1

This question was flagged and voted as off-topic. Since there were no answers, I simply deleted it.

This prompted me to double-check what's on-topic for the site.

Criteria according to 2

Be Specific

I'm a little confused because because NPAPI has been a known threat and attack vector for years. The question was related to whether or not Mozilla had any roadmaps

What background should I give in my question?

I'm confused here too. I linked to relevant news articles discussing what's going on for google Chrome and Microsoft's future Spartan release.

What topics can I ask about here?

Here I was a little naughty... I should have talked a little about how NPAPI exposes browsers to severe information leakage and outright compromise.

It was expressed in the single comment that the lifespan of the question was "too short," when at least according to 2, there is no mention of lifespan in nor here. Even scouring this help page, there is no mention of time-value. However, even if there were mention of it, lets say that OWASP decides to formally kill something like OWASP's ESAPI. (It could happen, there hasn't been a minor release since Sep. 2013.) It seems like this information would at least be valuable as a wiki that future questions could be referred to.

The time-value thing seems spurious: Languages deprecate features all the time. Does that invalidate someone's question on SO in regards to K&R C? Browsers deprecating dangerous APIs seems like an extremely worthy question. I've worked in environments within the last year that were required to support IE7. NPAPI deprecation may be relevant to future askers looking for reasons to argue against supporting particular browser versions.

The biggest criticism I think I can have for my question is that the answer might not come for several months. But we offer badges for precisely that kind of thing: Answering an old unanswered question. At any rate, if we're going to make "time-sensitivity" a criteria to close questions, I think we ought to modify our help documentation to make that clear. I wouldn't have asked my question had I been aware that it violated a constraint.

| |
5

I hadn't looked at that question until just now, but I can see why it got the close votes. The question itself boils down to "where is product x on vendor y's roadmap" - which is very rarely going to be on topic.

Either the vendor has made their roadmap public, in which case having the question and answer here adds no value, or they haven't, which makes any answer speculation.

As you can see, it isn't actually a question about security - despite the product in question being security related.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .