The guy who wrote the article understands nothing about the SDL, if he did, he would know that it is a learning process to do things better, not a cure all.
With every vulnerability found, there is a different attack vector learned to write better code. Microsoft has dissected and learned about each of the vulnerabilities found since the release and SP1 and learned from them. They have incorporated these "vectors" into the SDL process and has re-reviewed the code to make changes.
His logic is flawed because while they have made "un-documented" changes in the code, there may not be any specific vulnerability addressed. They have just provided better code.
Will there still be flaws? Absolutely, but with each vulnerability found, the SDL is improved for the next release. This is a good thing, not a bad thing. Being proactive, however, is also good for security. People who run machines without anti-virus, common sense, or a firewall have no place to complain about being hacked.
|