Skip to comments.
Most Unsecure OS? Yep -- it is Linux!
www.wininformant.com ^
| 1/13/03
| Paul Thurott
Posted on 01/13/2003 7:45:29 AM PST by ImaGraftedBranch
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
In part, the article states: "...more than 50 percent of all security advisories that CERT issued in the first 10 months of 2002 were for Linux and other open-source software solutions. The report muddles the argument that proprietary software such as Windows is inherently less secure than open solutions. And here's another blow to the status quo: Proprietary UNIX solutions were responsible for just as many security advisories as Linux in the same time period."
When there are 50 million Linux PCs to match the 50 million windows PCs, it will be extremely obvious that open source is not the way to go. You think the number of problems windows has had was bad? Wait until you have 50 million people using it, then fixing all of the problems -- as well as distributing them -- to people that purchased Linux because administrative costs were so low. Oh, Yeah -- we fired our administrators after we bought Linux....oops.
2
posted on
01/13/2003 7:45:45 AM PST
by
Mo1
(Join the DC Chapter at the Patriots Rally III on 1/18/03)
To: Bush2000
Your slipping, why didn't you post this ;)
To: ImaGraftedBranch
Actually, if the argument is simply the level of risk
associated with open systems vs. proprietary systems isn't
that simply another way of advocating "security through
obscurity" - a paradigm that is no longer embraced by the
security community (or so they say)?
4
posted on
01/13/2003 7:54:06 AM PST
by
The Duke
To: ImaGraftedBranch
I recieve these CERT Advisories.
I would like to see this groups research in detail. What types of advisories were listed? How severe were they? etc.
5
posted on
01/13/2003 7:58:10 AM PST
by
jbstrick
To: ImaGraftedBranch
Windows advocates were perfectly right last year to point out that the number of advisories was a worthless metric for determining the security of an operating system. It's still a worthless metric, even when the shoe's on the other foot...
6
posted on
01/13/2003 8:02:35 AM PST
by
general_re
(Q: How many C++ programmers does it take to change a light bulb?)
To: ImaGraftedBranch
...Aberdeen Group reports that more than 50 percent of all security advisories that CERT issued in the first 10 months of 2002 were for Linux and other open-source software solutions.Security advisories for open-source and Linux software accounted for 16 out of the 29 security advisories
They are not saying that Linux had more security problems than Windows, they are lumping Linux together with ALL open source software. There is a big difference.
To: Digital Chaos
Paul Thurrott
Write for Windows & .NET Magazine
Paul Thurrott is the news editor for Windows & .NET Magazine. He writes a weekly editorial
for Windows & .NET Magazine UPDATE (http://www.win2000mag.net/email) and writes a daily
Windows news and information newsletter called WinInfo Daily UPDATE (http://www.wininformant.com).
Did a quick google search on Thurott. He's got a dog in this fight, that's for sure.
To: Digital Chaos
From what I understand, the major versions of Linux (Mandrake, Red Hat, and the PRC rip-off of Red Hat - Red Flag) ARE open-source.
*shudders*
I'll stick with Windows.
9
posted on
01/13/2003 8:10:43 AM PST
by
hchutch
("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
To: ImaGraftedBranch
This one is a howler.
Tell me again why all my customers are trying like crazy to get onto a Linux or Unix-based platform and away from NT and MS in general.
Tell me why, of all the scans that my web servers get, the bulk of them are from Windows boxes that have been compromised with the NIMDA virus (a patch for which has been out for a year).
10
posted on
01/13/2003 8:11:56 AM PST
by
ikka
(Impeach him harder!)
To: jbstrick
I'd like to see some details too.
The vast majority of viruses and worms are transmitted by e-mail. Yes, servers are vulnerable from attack directly, so lets see the security comparison between the two servers, under direct attack.
Linux and Windows servers may be just as vulnerable on the system level (although I doubt it), but the huge doorway into the organization is Outlook. It doesn't matter how secure your front door is, when you've got the garage door wide open and every kid in the neighborhood can wander in.
Comment #12 Removed by Moderator
To: chance33_98
Your slipping, why didn't you post this ;)
Because this isn't anything new. Most everyone (without an ideological axe to grind, that is) recognizes that open source code is just as buggy as closed source.
13
posted on
01/13/2003 8:48:48 AM PST
by
Bush2000
To: ikka
Tell me again why all my customers are trying like crazy to get onto a Linux or Unix-based platform and away from NT and MS in general.
Because you're a dedicated ABMer who doesn't serve MS customers.
14
posted on
01/13/2003 8:49:22 AM PST
by
Bush2000
To: 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten
Did a quick google search on Thurott. He's got a dog in this fight, that's for sure.
Thurott is merely reporting research by Aberdeen Group. Are they shills, too? /NOT
15
posted on
01/13/2003 8:50:26 AM PST
by
Bush2000
To: ImaGraftedBranch
Without knowing the severity and scope of the advisories, you can't really make a comparison. As an analogy, just counting legal infractions would make me, with maybe a half-dozen traffic citations, a worse criminal than a person with a single murder conviction.
To: chance33_98; All
Look at the date on this article.
It's old, and was indeed posted before.
It is a falsified report. Funny stuff, actually. Look into how they arrived at their conclusions . . .
Propaganda has to be repeated, to be effective.
And yes, Smeagol2000 was there.
Nasty little linuxes, smeagol will throttle them, yessss, preciousssss.
To: Dominic Harr
It's old, and was indeed posted before.
November 11, 2002. That's old?
It is a falsified report.
It's pretty amusing to see Linux sycophants twist in the wind when their lies are exposed...
18
posted on
01/13/2003 9:07:40 AM PST
by
Bush2000
To: ImaGraftedBranch
" When there are 50 million Linux PCs to match the 50 million windows PCs"
Most front end equipment (routers, cable modems, etc.) use open source OS's. Many (probably a large portion) of the Windows machines in the home or business hide behind a NON-MS operating system.
This front end equipment takes the brunt of attacks. The simple fact is that if you have a Windows machine on a network without a firewall, you WILL get infected. Probably within 45 minutes.
Even with a firewall, if you run IE for a browser and/or Outlook for mail, you WILL get infected.
19
posted on
01/13/2003 9:31:05 AM PST
by
babygene
To: ImaGraftedBranch
When there are 50 million Linux PCs to match the 50 million windows PCs, it will be extremely obvious that open source is not the way to go. The Aberdeen Group is lulling unwary Windows users into a false sense of security with their flawed analysis. Counting advisories is not the way to determine which platform is most vulnerable.
History shows that *nix system users are more diligent about reporting security issues as soon as they are discovered, and issuing a fix as soon as possible. Microsoft ignores security issues, avoids issuing security advisories and delays issuing fixes.
20
posted on
01/13/2003 9:32:04 AM PST
by
HAL9000
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson