Its always funny to read articles like this one from CNet (and MANY other sources):
http://news.com.com/Symantec+sees+an+Achilles+heel+in+Vista/2100-7355_3-6095119.html?tag=nefd.lede
"Researchers at Cupertino, Calif.-based Symantec examined the new networking technology in recent test releases of Vista, Microsoft's next major operating system release, according to the report. They found several security bugs and determined that Vista's networking technology will be less stable, at least in the short run, than Windows XP's, the report said."
OK, that sounds kind of scary to the average Joe, until you read a little further down:
"Symantec researchers put the networking technology in Vista under a magnifying glass to determine its exposure to external attacks. The team said it found several flaws in build 5270 of Vista and even more in earlier test versions. However, these were all fixed by Microsoft in build 5384, the version of the operating system that was publicly released in May as Beta 2."
So what you are telling me is that, the current BETA (Beta 2) has NO KNOWN SECURITY HOLES, but the old (Alpha and Beta 1) had some? Why the hell is this news? ITS A BETA!!! Hello!!!!
The thing this article does tell me is that a) reporters sensationalise anything they can and b) Microsofts Security Development Lifecycle is working :)