Security vendors contribute significantly to cybersecurity research, shaping industry practices and budget allocations. However, many fall into predictable pitfalls that damage credibility and mislead audiences. The author identifies these "sins" as a way to encourage better research practices among vendors rather than to shame them. One major issue is the use of fear tactics, where research exaggerates threats to drive sales. Claims of unprecedented dangers and critical vulnerabilities often lack context, leaving readers skeptical. Good research should clarify impacts and solutions, rather than merely instilling fear. Another common problem is false novelty. Vendors often repackage existing findings as groundbreaking without proper citations, which misleads readers and disrespects the research community. The author emphasizes the importance of literature reviews to avoid this pitfall. Furthermore, there's a tendency to confuse correlation with causation, where researchers draw unwarranted conclusions from data. This can lead to misattribution of threats, such as incorrectly linking all cryptocurrency-related attacks to North Korea. Finally, the article warns against the dangers of allowing marketing to overshadow research integrity. While marketing can amplify research, it must not distort the findings. When marketing takes precedence, it erodes trust with informed audiences. The author calls for vendors to maintain a clear separation between marketing and research, ensuring that the latter remains credible and valuable.