The straight dope on *nix vs. Windows 7 Security

Linux don't need malware. The users mess it up themselves.

 

That could be said of any OS though.

 

I've used both just fine without any added security and as far as i know i've never been hacked or infected. My experience tells me its not so much the software you're using thats the problem its the people using the software.

 

My way of seeing it is this:

1) Linux is more secure than windows by DEFAULT

2) Windows can be made as secure, if not more secure, than Linux if first-party (SRP/APPLOCKER/EMET) and some 3rd party (HIPS/Sandboxing) are used.

3) Both have user separation - UAC and root/standard user. Linux is more robust however it has had this built in since day one - If windows did too it would be just as robust. I bet windows 8 will implement UAC even better.

4) Linux, Windows, Mac, Unix, BeOS, BSD, etc. all have their purpose. Windows and Mac aim to be as user friendly as posible and aim to please customers to make money (not a bad thing). Linux aims to be free, open source, and (some distros) aim to be easy to use but also stable and as bug free and secure as posible. IMO Linux is best used for pentesting/hacking, modding, programming, and as home PC for a more advanced user (not as much any more). Windows is great for the HUGE amount of applications and wide use by many people - meaning lots of support for many applications and games etc. (great example is HIPS like D+ I have found nothing like it for any OS except windows). Mac is a great alternative to windows and the application supply is on the increase as their sales go up.

5) apparmour/SeLinux both work similarly to EMET but also (apparmour only?) can isolate/sandbox application for even more security.

I use all 3 OS's (Windows, Mac, Linux) and I must admit linux is may favorite as it include all of may must have features (FDE, Stable, Full control via terminal, etc.). I use Mac as my primary laptop and for app development and media design, and finally windows for all the MS only stuff because MS did get some stuff right (Office 2010 is awesome IMO).


IN short what I am saying is:
If you want tons of apps and support - Windows and Mac are options
if you want out of the box security - Linux/Unix are options
If you want 3rd party security - linux/unix, mac, and windows are options
If you want fewer viruses (for now) - linux/unix and Mac are options
If you want built in FDE - linux/unix and Windows are options (soon to be Mac)

It is really a personal opinion and even when I do use linux (which is more secure than others out-of-the-box) I add an AV (ESET) and Firewall controller (FireStarter). It is always wise to use security even if your system is 100% secure because tomorrow it mat not be.

Stay safe all.

 

This is basically what I was saying was incorrect before. 3rd party applications aren't good for security because they're too easily manipulated compared to security that's handled by the kernel. You just won't get nix level security on Windows unless they rewrite the kernel and change the default policies.

Linux has far more separation between the user and admin/ root than Windows. Kernel level separations -- OS based.

Linux could be the most popular OS in the word and malware would still have a very very hard time. Social engineering is difficult on linux because of how the OS is separated from the user land applications.

The fact that linux is open source is also a huuuuge security feature compared to the closed source Windows.

 

A Standard User Account, integrity levels and AppLocker is enough security for me.

 

The only thing I can think of as default as why a Linux desktop distro will still have an edge as Windows does not have limited accounts setup as default and UAC is not a replacement (has been discussed on here numerous times).

With a bit of tweaking the differences narrow to insignificance, factors such as configuration and experience make more of a difference than the difference in the operating systems.

 

How ?

 

Because when you have an entire community of developers looking at your source code it's a lot easier to find and patch security holes. Closed source means you only have your company developers looking at it.

 

There are hundreds of Linux distros, all vary to some degree or another, eg. Arch is not the same as CentOS which differs from Mandriva etc.etc.
So a big headache for malware writers - is it worth their while just targetting one particular distro ? I would say no. For max. coverage Windows is the ticket.
BTW. an AV will really only scan for Windows viruses/malware. I use one out of courtesy to Windows users that I send stuff to.

 

I could provide source with my closed source product, but have a licence that prevents a users from redistributing modified source and/or builds based on derivatives (but they could examine the source and report defects back to me).

And even if my product IS open source, if I do not provide a mechanism for users to merge their changes with mine (no public source repository, my build system with test suites), then how is that going to make product more secure, just because I made it open source ?

Also, why do you think having the source available makes it easier to find security holes compared to testing of the final running code ?

You did hit upon what I think is the key point though and that is the community - pure number of users contributing (be it developers or defect report) which exposes how secure/insecure a product/project is

Cheers, Nick.

 

Yes when is it patch tuesday for linux?
Coz I pawn your linux
-http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/17439/

 

@Nick Rhodes: You forgot about the repositories.

@Spoony: I would be surprised if there are no vulnerabilities.
Doubt it works on all distros though.

 

It is also worth pointing out that many of the vulnerabilities are in third party software such as Flash and Java. As the OS becomes more secure hackers look for other ways in.

 

Not open source specific (big example is Windows update), though advantageous as a trusted source of software and updates.

Cheers, Nick

 

How do you gain access to a Linux system to run that exploit ?
Yes, it appears to be a valid local exploit, but without a delivery vector you won't "pawn" any Linux system with this exploit alone.

Cheers, Nick

 

you want a shellcode root privilege elevation one as well?

I've been using linux since Ive been using computers. I love Linux. I use windows too but I like my keyboard and a command prompt. Love dos as well.
Anyways its proven that a OS with a big install base will always be targeted more. Mac users went thru the times not worrying about a firewall or security products etc etc. Suddenly people started using them and what happened?
For me you can't compare the two. I mean Cmon people linux is free. Almost everyone is running windows for certain things but LinuX is there its free so use it. don't need to bother bout dual boots theses days there's virtual machines wonderful ways to learn linux while your still messing around on another OS your familiar with. Linux is more secure. UAC are almost base in a way on linux security with its root privileges. So you can have the best of both worlds. Linux for your web surfing and most stuff you do over the public internet and windows to do what other things you have been doing on it.

 

Nick I posted that one because the other one that does pawn linux are a downloadable link. Don't think I can post it here.
But here's another one
http://securityreason.com/securitya...feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed: securityalert_database %28SecurityAlert Database - Vulnerability Database%29

 

To wrap it all up:
The question is very similar to:

Do I want to eat pork or chicken?
Do I want DirectTV or Dish Network?
Do I want Cable internet or DSL internet?
Do I sleep on the right side of my spouse or the left side?
Do I watch reality TV or science fiction movies?
Do I drink beer or wine with my dinner?

...

 

Ha-ha...that does sum it up nicely

 

one of my teacher said bad guys dont date average normal girls they get bored they look for easy pray or hot models


same way security system anything below average normal or secure like pentagon = venerability

it definitely attract hackers

so who you want your system to be easy pray or hot model

 

hahahaha very funny wilbertnl


its feel like this to me

what girls use to do with a rose and keep pulling petals and say

linux loves me oh .....linux loves me not

windows loves me oh poor me ......windows loves me not

mac loves me .............mac loves me not

hackers loves me .......hackers loves me not

................................

 

Beef
Webstreams
Mobile Broadband
Onto....... no wait pass on that one
Dramas
Rum

Posted from a MAC

 

I will have to disagree because shell code is NOT an exploit shell code is the payload to the exploit. While I get what you are saying and your point is valid Linux has never had as many remote exploits compared to windows (not including 3-rd party as this isn't the OS's fault). Most linux exploits are Local only or LAN only not WAN.

Both are good OS's though. and neither is 100% safe.

Also that said Linux does have a lot of vulnerabilities too (but they get fixed faster; take a look at Ubuntu i get updates almost daily.)

 

@Spooony: OS X or old school like your DOS?