<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Third Party Patches for Windows?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mcwresearch.com/archives/103/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mcwresearch.com/archives/103</link>
	<description>Things I think I've thought about</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: mcwresearch.com &#187; Rapid Versus Responsible Disclosure</title>
		<link>http://mcwresearch.com/archives/103#comment-183</link>
		<dc:creator>mcwresearch.com &#187; Rapid Versus Responsible Disclosure</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 2006 15:45:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcwresearch.com/archives/103#comment-183</guid>
		<description>[...] Back in April I wrote a series of posts about third party patches. I was irked after the WMF and the IE createtextrange() vulnerabilities were disclosed rapidly and weeks before Microsoft&#8217;s asinine, rigid monthly patch cycle. I won&#8217;t revisit the series here, you can read it seperately if you are curious but in neither case did Microsoft deem it necessary to release an out of cycle patch. As an aside, in article three of the series I was again commenting on one of Alan&#8217;s articles. I know it, looks like I&#8217;m a Shimmy fanatic. =) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Back in April I wrote a series of posts about third party patches. I was irked after the WMF and the IE createtextrange() vulnerabilities were disclosed rapidly and weeks before Microsoft&#8217;s asinine, rigid monthly patch cycle. I won&#8217;t revisit the series here, you can read it seperately if you are curious but in neither case did Microsoft deem it necessary to release an out of cycle patch. As an aside, in article three of the series I was again commenting on one of Alan&#8217;s articles. I know it, looks like I&#8217;m a Shimmy fanatic. =) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mcwresearch.com &#187; IE Createtextrange Vuln went quiet</title>
		<link>http://mcwresearch.com/archives/103#comment-41</link>
		<dc:creator>mcwresearch.com &#187; IE Createtextrange Vuln went quiet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Apr 2006 15:47:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcwresearch.com/archives/103#comment-41</guid>
		<description>[...] I&#8217;ve had plenty of time to think about and read about differing opinions on the &#8220;third-party patch&#8221; quandary (my original post on it is here). I&#8217;ve read opinions that companies could be releasing third-party patches as a means of getting their name in front of potential customers or as a means of PR/advertisement. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I&#8217;ve had plenty of time to think about and read about differing opinions on the &#8220;third-party patch&#8221; quandary (my original post on it is here). I&#8217;ve read opinions that companies could be releasing third-party patches as a means of getting their name in front of potential customers or as a means of PR/advertisement. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
