Guess you didn't hear about the latest WMF exploit ... Norton was of zero help to many people who got infected.
And most all people using Windows, regardless of browser, is vulnerable ... merely browsing files in file manager is enough ... more ominious, there are confirmed reports that people can be infected via Google Desktop. Filtering the extension is of no help because WMF can be easily disguised / legitimately embedded within in some other types of files; Windows often ignores extensions anyways and relies on the file header for local files and the content type header for remotely downloaded files, such as by web browser.
Virus scanners, etc are useful for sure, but are no where near 100% ... many people tend to place more confidence in technology, in particular consumer based products, then they should...
Ie. Firefox ... it's had its share of nasty exploits, and still has numerous security issues. Not sure what the solution is for most computer users who want to run Windows-like apps beyond encouraging them to switch to using a Mac.
What an IDN API is expected is complex and prone to error ... heck, if MS can't get rendering of a graphics format right (heck, this is the second WMF flaw in the past month [some suspect the last patch made this exploit even worse]), then it's a stretch to believe MS, and other manufactures for that matter, to get IDNs even close to 100%; IDN resolution will be "best guess" for quite awhile, like it or not.
Yes, there is a need for IDNs and they will continue to become more popular / widespread, but as with any tool, there are shortcomings one needs to be aware of; being honest about the various limitations/flaws will be more beneficial in the longrun than blind trust where it's not warranted.
Ron
