Discussion in 'other security issues & news' started by ronjor, Jan 4, 2006.
The good thing is, while their maybe more flaws in Linux/Unix ... the fact that it isn't any where near is popular as Windows, helps it remain 'safe', I don't believe there as many currently active exploitable holes as there are in Windows. I feel completely safe using it, I'm far more adventurous in Linux than Windows, in regards to risky hex ... I employ as no security measures other than file permissions, a basic firewall, (other than the gateway router) and an Clam AV ... and still no harm done.
It is funny though how popularity dictates perception .... I'd have thought it the other way around ... Overall good going by M$. Other than the latest current exploit, which has been known to them for quite some time, yet remained unpatched until the day before yesterday. It says a lot about Microsofts new dedication to security. Well done.
This is very dumb, actually. "Unix/Linux" is not a single operating system. Any given OpenBSD or NetBSD distribution has had only an infinitesimal part of the reported "Unix/Linux" vulnerabilities. Not to mention that to define a thing "a vulnerability" says almost nothing at all anyway. A local denial of service is certainly not like a remote root access vulnerability.
Also, many Linux distributions come with a truckload of installed programs; Windows comes with almost no installed programs at all. Are they including those utilities too?
Experts question Windows win in flaw tally
Yep. Actually, these statistics are not even "flawed", they are just dumb. I work both on a Windows machine and UNIX machine and I certainly didn't have to fix 2,328 vulnerabilities for the latter (nor did anybody in the world for his own). On the contrary, I almost had nothing to patch at all.
Separate names with a comma.