<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Are Third Party Patches The Only Choice?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mcwresearch.com/archives/108/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mcwresearch.com/archives/108</link>
	<description>Things I think I've thought about</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:45:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: mcwresearch.com &#187; Rapid Versus Responsible Disclosure</title>
		<link>http://mcwresearch.com/archives/108/comment-page-1#comment-182</link>
		<dc:creator>mcwresearch.com &#187; Rapid Versus Responsible Disclosure</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:39:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcwresearch.com/archives/108#comment-182</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>
</channel>
</rss>

