Re: Who’s worse?
> "it is far less efficient to spend time crafting an attack for 5% of the market than it is for 95%."
That depends on the target. Apple users were (and some still are) convinced that Apple products could not get infected by virii etc.
So if 95% of banks had their current security setup, but 5% of banks didn't believe bank robbers would target them for "insert reason here", and thus didn't implement sufficient security, which would you go for?
Biting the hand that feeds IT
