Supercharging Linux: Tips & Tricks to Beat the Threat Landscape

LinuxSecurity ^ | 26 September 2023 | Brittany Day

[ShadowAce]

It is no wonder that Linux has captured the lion's share of the IT market

I think the fact that it is free also has something to do with that.

Except it is NOT free at the corporate level. Not even Ubuntu. In fact, our RHEL site license rivals MS in cost.

[daniel1212]

Except it is NOT free at the corporate level. Not even Ubuntu. In fact, our RHEL site license rivals MS in cost.

But did Google pay for it? Related: Red Alert for Android Users: Google Gives Police Your Identification If Police Say You Were Near a Crime

[ShadowAce]

What does Google have to do with RHEL site licenses?

[daniel1212]

What does Google have to do with RHEL site licenses?

I mentioned Google as not paying for Linux, and in relation to Goggle itself, how it is using its modified version of the Linux kernel as relates to privacy. Which does not impugn Linux at all, but I thought that you would find this story that just was posted to be of interest.

[Openurmind]

“Quite a stat.”

Actually it is. So far almost all Linux vulnerabilities required physical access to the machine, user passkey, and SU root access. Intentional or accidental. :)

[daniel1212]

Actually it is. So far almost all Linux vulnerabilities required physical access to the machine, user passkey, and SU root access. Intentional or accidental. :)

My favorite flavor was Puppy Linux, run as root! A defense of it: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/46287/when-does-the-puppy-linux-security-model-make-sense

My concern was that of using patented multimedia codecs, which I worked to avoid.

[Openurmind]

I fully understand your moral position.

[ShadowAce]

I mentioned Google as not paying for Linux

OK--I had misunderstand your statement.

In any case, though, Google *did* pay for Linux in the sense that they paid their developers to write their own version.

[ShadowAce]

s/misunderstand/misunderstood/