Search: Home Bugtraq Vulnerabilities Mailing Lists Jobs Tools Beta Programs
Linux vs. Windows Viruses
Scott Granneman, 2003-10-02

To mess up a Linux box, you need to work at it; to mess up your Windows box, you just need to work on it.

Comments Mode:
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-02
Anonymous (13 replies)
This enture article needs serious reconsideration. Main problems:

1) The premise that Linux is more secure because a user has to go through more gyrations to execute the attachment. Once users are taught how to do this, then they will go right on spreading the virus just like in the MS world. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. 2003-10-03
Anonymous (3 replies)
Good reply, I completely agree. This article belongs on ZDNet. I'm disappointed in Secfocus, you guys are better than this.

Doesn't this author have to run his story through a knowledgeable and technical person before it gets posted? I've never seen so many false assumptions and ridiculous claims...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided 2003-10-06
Anonymous (3 replies)
Hmm.. the last two people don't seem to have completely understood the article. The point is that the number of viruses that succeed on Linux is surprisingly low compared to the number of sytems. Macintoshes already had more viruses with a much lower user base. That's the _experimental evidence_....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2003-10-06
Anonymous (3 replies)
The real reason Linux is more secure then windows is because it's harder to use.

That's right.

Linux requires smarter people to use it on average, and thus they don't get viruses as easily. Mac was/is for artsy people who may or may not be technically smart. With Linux you have to be.

So y...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2003-10-06
Anonymous (2 replies)
Who says Macs are for just artsy types? james Gosling (inventory of Java), Tim Berners-Lee (inventor of the web) and Tim Bray (co-inventor of XML) all use Macs. Yeah, they're artsy, alright -- they're code artists, compared to all the PC trolls that infest these forums and defend Microsoft.

I sup...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2003-10-07
Anonymous (3 replies)
"I support Windows 2000 networks for a living, and I KNOW about the problems keeping them secure."

Well, you are either lying or you are a bad administrator, either way, a Windows 2000 environment is not a difficult thing to secure with the proper processes and solutions in place. Maybe you are j...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2003-10-07
Anonymous-2 (1 replies)
Hang on, you don't know the conditions he has to work under. Indeed, a well setup system would be nice, but if he has to "fight fires" as he says, then he doesn't have the time to set this up.

"You'd be surprised just how far you can go, if you remove your limitations."...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2003-10-08
Anonymous (1 replies)
"Hang on, you don't know the conditions he has to work under. Indeed, a well setup system would be nice, but if he has to "fight fires" as he says, then he doesn't have the time to set this up."

If the job is worth two cents, he could tell management that we can continue to "fight fires" all the ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2003-10-08
Krysalis
If you ever tried to explain to your CxO that your staff is overworked and underpaid and the budget cuts are cutting on security as well (as hell), and you did not find a pink slip next day on your table, can I drop my resume on your lap? I would love to work for your company.

I'm a hard-working ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided -- And seriously misguided! 2003-10-08
Anonymous (1 replies)
Unbelievable! As quoted above:
"I'm also interested in these problems you are having... what are they exactly? Viruses? Do you have a managed AV solution in place?"

You just proved the guy's point!!! Do you need an AV solution if all your boxes are Linux? NO! Just that alone makes a Unix/Linux n...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided -- And seriously misguided! 2003-10-08
Anonymous (1 replies)
I think this discussion shows the real people problem.

Obviously many Microsoft software products are less secure than comparable systems, any objective look at the figures and history shows this clearly.

People who count Bugtraq vulnerabilities and then shout "see Linux is worse" just missed ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided -- And seriously misguided! 2003-10-10
Anonymous (1 replies)
"Obviously many Microsoft software products are less secure than comparable systems, any objective look at the figures and history shows this clearly."

And just as obviously many non MS software products are less secure than comparable MS systems.

"People who count Bugtraq vulnerabilities and ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided -- And seriously misguided! 2007-12-04
Anonymous
Hey, that was some practical comments.
I guess one of the reason for this hot discussion is that, Bill Gates, who is not the smartest computer nerd, made the most money. I think all the real smart nerds are angry and came up with Unix/Linux. (Others started making virus to attack Windows)
Academ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2003-10-09
Anonymous
owyep yep.

I guess you know: make a standard windows installation. do nothing, just keep it online - and someone will break in. But a standard linux-installation just keeps the ports closed, no-one breaks in. No user has to do with this, isnt it?

If you want to keep up a win2000 system, you ha...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad Macs, too 2003-10-08
Krysalisk
Macs are less desirable targets, because:
- prior to OSX, most Mac's innards were much less documented, i.e., less exploitable by script kiddies;
- user-friendly deep-system tweaking and programming tools for Mac either nonexistent, or expensive, or both. The same about the documentation ("just sh...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2003-10-08
Anonymous (3 replies)
Linux isn't "harder to use". It is harder to learn. Once you've learned it, it is extremely easy to use. Far easier than Windows....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2003-10-08
Anonymous (2 replies)
i'm not so sure about that. i don't think gandma will be rcompiling a kernel anytime soon....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2006-08-25
Anonymous
Apple and OSX brought UNIX to grandma....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2009-06-23
Anonymous
Home users don't have to compile kernels.
And Linux really isn't harder to learn unless you have WinDoze on the brain from using MS stuff for too long. If Linux is the first OS a person learns, the difference is moot. To a newbie, learning Windoze is pretty damn hard. Linux is not harder than Linux...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2005-10-04
Anonymous
linux isnt harder to learn at all, just different. Most people don't learn about computers. They simply learn how to login, open word and check their email. I 'learnt' to muck about with windows because it was the only machine i had. Then i learnt Linux, its no harder. Infact some bits make more sen...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2008-07-01
Anonymous
Why do i need certification course to use my desktop?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2008-10-24
Anonymous (1 replies)
Ubuntu is a very easy os to use I have people that never used a computer in there life using ubuntu some of them are in there 60's 8.04 and they find it very easy to use so I do not know what you are talking about. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided - More Misguided 2008-11-24
Anonymous
How old is this forum? I see dates from 2003?

People who know nothing about Linux are usually those opposing Linux. To make a career in IT more secure, it will be advisable to learn Linux. Linux have grown dramatically since I started using and administering Linux - and Ubuntu, as well as others ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided 2003-10-07
Anonymous (1 replies)
Just let me get it right: 'Marketing' stands for a dark power of evil where many dollars are spent just to lurk innocent users into deterioration? Sorry, but to me that sounds like someone reading too much fantasy storys. Instead it shows that many vulnerabilities come from striving for functional c...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided 2003-10-11
Anonymous
You didn't understand even one single word in this whole discussion, did you? ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided 2003-10-07
Anonymous (1 replies)
"Macintoshes already had more viruses with a much lower user base." (compared to Linux.)

This is not a factually complete statement.

First, I doubt there is much difference in the current user base of the Mac and Linux. I base this statement on the Google search engine's Zeitgeist figures, whi...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. - Misguided 2003-10-11
Anonymous
"First, I doubt there is much difference in the current user base of the Mac and Linux. I base this statement on the Google search engine's Zeitgeist figures, which shows the Mac with a 3% share, Linux with a 1% share."

You must be kidding. Googles Zeitgeist only sees machines that people surf w...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. 2003-10-07
Anonymous
Bzzt. Try again.

Of the two hundred million windows boxes out there, how many are connected to Active Directoires with group policies?

Less than 1% I wager....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses - Sad. 2008-11-24
Anonymous
Windows flat ass SUCKS. Get over it already. You want to keep using that loser platform, be my guest, but get off the back of folks that have seen with their fully opened eyes that there is something better out there, and it's freaking FREE!!
You want to keep throwing your money to Gates, go right ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (5 replies)
"Give them Linux boxes and they'll all be running as root"

That is actually what I thought, and exactly what is true. I have installed Linuxes and BSDs for many people, setup another account for them and explained exactly what root is for - you go back a few days later, they are logged in as root...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
Yes, that is right. The problem is the users. But, Unix like systems have been there for a few decades. People use unix system don't run system as roots. Who is responsible for making people run a linux system as roots? It is not that I don't like MS OS. I use MS Windows at home too. However, if a M...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous (2 replies)
funny - I NEVER _mention_ root to ANYONE I set up a GNU/Linux box for (and they never ask). You must not be setting up the machine correctly and are giving them root access to make up for some deficiency in your sysadmin skills. Why would you EVER tell a new or first time user about the superuser ac...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Catalina Thunders
That's exactly right. NEVER give anyone access to the root, they don't need it & it's just asking for trouble. That's IT's job, not the end users'....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-07
Karl
I concur with the above post. There is no reason to give a user the root password if you have set the system up correctly....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-07
Anonymous
The solution is:
Don't let the users know, that it is possible to run as root and using a GUI
Remove root from you XDM or KDM icons.
Only show the normal user.
Tell the user that root can only be activated by su....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-07
Anonymous (1 replies)
Then you need to re-read the article.

Yes, the users are to blame for quite a lot. However, if you actually read the article, the author said that even if a virus takes over root (obviously easier if you're logged in as root) and runs, it still won't spread as far or as fast as Windows simply fo...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses..Blame the Users? 2003-10-08
Anonymous (1 replies)
it's way too easy to blame the users. Why not require anyone who needs a computer to get an IS degree? Truth is, most people want to use their computer as they use their telephone or VCR. It is a tool to write letters, do some bookkeeping, play games, send email and surf the web. No one expects to h...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses..Blame the Users? 2003-10-15
Anonymous
Even to use hair dryer you need to know some things about electricity or even physics otherwise you may not use it efficiently or securely. Luckily we teach children early how to securely use tools. So it is common knowledge.

The thing is that hairdryer is simple machine with 2-3 functions easy t...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2006-03-14
windows xp professional
at last a correct statement, people will most of the time use the quickest method.. the whole idea of a computer is to do things quickly and thats what most people want from there computer..
ive used mac os and didnt get on with it, i use linux and windows but at the end of the day its the mighty w...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,shill@microsoft.com, but no. 2003-10-03
Anonymous (1 replies)
1) RTFA: Not only are the "gyrations" there, but warnings pop up to let the user know exactly what may go wrong if they do it.

2) Outlook does not just "execute" attachments by itself? yes and no (ever hear of Active X controls? HTML mails can execute those eaily enough, and just today MS warned...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-04
Anonymous (10 replies)
I'll just answer my part out of that rant you just wrote:

"2) Outlook does not just "execute" attachments by itself? yes and no (ever hear of Active X controls? HTML mails can execute those eaily enough, and just today MS warned of yet another problem w/ IE and ActiveX that somehow hasn't been pa...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs, what a joke 2003-10-06
Anonymous (3 replies)
Yeah, but do you know any good administrators that run Windows on their servers? I don't....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs, what a joke 2003-10-07
Anonymous (3 replies)
Yeah, well, you don't normally get a lot of exposure in your Mom's basement.

BTW - don't knock MCSE's because they choose to get certified for something. Many employers require MCSE certificates, and if it helps you get a job, you will get it. Hey, now that I think about it, why don't you go tell...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs, what a joke 2003-10-07
Anonymous (1 replies)
>>Yeah, well, you don't normally get a lot of exposure in your Mom's basement.

BTW - don't knock MCSE's because they choose to get certified for something. Many employers require MCSE certificates, and if it helps you get a job, you will get it. Hey, now that I think about it, why don't you go ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs, what a joke 2003-10-13
Anonymous
I'd be happy to teach you about SYN/ACK and three-way handshakes. I'd also be glad to teach you about the two fingered salute.

Linux zealot. :p...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs, what a joke 2003-10-07
Anonymous
Actually sweetheart, employers have been burned by too many paper MCSE's to bother these days. Now they just want experience and a four-year degree.

And that is why MCSE's are a dime-a-dozen....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs, what a joke 2003-10-11
Anonymous
Most doctors have to learn something to get a certificate. MCSEs don't. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSE Unix Administrator 2003-10-10
Anonymous
I have an MCSE. I used to (be forced to) make an NT 4 network *work* with high availability, etc. That caused me so much stress that I now refuse (because I can with my current job) to use any platform other than unix. Currently, it's solaris, but we're looking at moving lock stock and barrel to ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs, what a joke 2003-10-14
MCSE
How about you Mr. GEEK?
What are you administering and supporting - an A class Unix-only-network ?

Besides, such posts distract from the real topic.

...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
RE: Sorry "Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no.", but definitely not... 2003-10-06
Anonymous (1 replies)
Surely the point is that you HAVE to disable downloading ActiveX controls. Your average user (Well trained admins aside) won't do this, firstly because it limits their "User experience" and secondly because they just don't know how or why they'd want to. In most Linux apps you need to specifically t...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Agreed - Windows is simply less secure. 2003-10-07
Penguinisto
The point of the article was about the given environment of an OS, not about what an OS can do if you tweak it hard enough.

Even Win32 can be made halfway secure if you're willing to invest time and resources into it... the problem is (as Scott points out), that it takes more work by orders of ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-06
Anonymous (1 replies)
Likewise, any good administrator would *never* give out the root password to ordinary users. Ordinary users in any organization should *never* have access to priviledged accounts.

As far as ordinary users at home, they don't have access to a professional administrator to lock down their systems. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-08
Anonymous (2 replies)
Thank you...This message will probably get moderated out but finally someone who spells out the real problem with running Windows programs.

I'm not a Windows guru but I tried to setup some Windows 2000 Pro boxes with unprivileged users and I had to make them all administrators because none of the...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-09
Anonymous
Well, we run quite a lot of apps under unprivviledged accounts and they all function fine - office, graphics, internet, e-mail, scientific, databases, CAD/CAM, etc.
So if you have problems with this then it's either yours or developer's fault, not Microsofts, since Windows does provide what you ne...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-11
Anonymous
Ironically even some Microsoft apps won't run without a "Power User" account. What is a separation of privileges good for if you can't use it because then your apps won't run?

Maybe you guessed it: right, nothing.

...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-06
Anonymous (1 replies)
Ummm... You're right. It is possible to secure things in Windows, if you know what you are doing. What about the millions of home users that aren't part of your AD tree/forest and aren't getting your policies pushed to them. The point here is that security is not the default in Microsoft land. S...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-07
Anonymous
Amen!...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,shill@micrsoft.com, but no... again. 2003-10-07
Anonymous (1 replies)
If you want to travel to each and every workstation and shut it off (only to have the employees turn them back on again, which is usual), fine. You run around and do just that. ;)

Note that I never said it was impossible to shut it off, but the time and effort are not exerted 99.999% of the time,...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@you-gotta-be-kidding.com, but no... YET again. 2003-10-08
Anonymous (1 replies)
"If you want to travel to each and every workstation and shut it off (only to have the employees turn them back on again, which is usual), fine. You run around and do just that. ;)"

You just displayed how little you know about Active Directory. We don't "travel" to every workstation, we make the ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@you-gotta-be-kidding.com, but no... YET again. 2003-10-11
Anonymous
"They cannot "turn them back on again", their privilege levels do not allow them to change anything on the corporate base image."

That's what you believe. Just as we believed the first RPC patch would fix the problem. Just as we believed that Outlooks security settings would really be able to se...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-07
Anonymous
Huh? Look at what you said:

Tools
Internet Options
Security
Custom Settings (under the Internet zone)
Scroll down to "ActiveX controls and plug-ins".

Why so many steps to get there?
Why are Active X controls and plug ins "Custom Settings" and placed under a subset of security?
If t...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Users can't control their admins 2003-10-08
Anonymous
>>Any good administrator will not allow ActiveX controls to download<<

Except these days companies will often decide to hire an MCSE fresh out of tech. school because he'll work for $20K less per year than someone who is actually qualified. The hundreds of users whose PCs are left vulnerable by ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-08
Krysalisk
To disable wholesale ActiveX/Java/scripting is not an option in most non-highly structured environments. The user wants her Amazon account back NOW....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-11
Anonymous
"Any good administrator will not allow ActiveX controls to download yet alone execute in the Internet zone, ever looked at the zone settings in IE? (IE/Outlook, use the same zone settings in case you didn't know)."

Bzzt, try again.

How many of the 200 million windows systems worldwide are pr...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sorry,ltorvalds@space-for-rent.com, but no. 2003-10-14
Anonymous
"Any good administrator will not allow ActiveX controls to download yet alone execute in the Internet zone, ever looked at the zone settings in IE? (IE/Outlook, use the same zone settings in case you didn't know)."

That is correct, but you are missing one big point. Average Joe and Jane user don'...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous
So we should replace people instead of OS? :)...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-04
Anonymous
I've been in the Virus fighting business for over 12 years. Yes, most folks will do anything to overcome any effort that 'slows' down 'their' system. I've seen folks that disabled VirusScan on DOS machines because their favorite game disks were infected with boot, FAT or other viruses that immedia...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (Another "I HATE WINBLOWZ") 2003-10-05
Anonymous (2 replies)
I totally disagree with this article. This person is just like those other kids on irc that go on bashing windows and think they are "uberly leet" that they use Linux. Without the different versions of MS Windows released, Linux wouldn't be where it is today. Personally, you can't really compare Win...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (Another "I HATE WINBLOWZ") 2003-10-06
Anonymous (4 replies)
You have got to be kidding that windows is easy to use. Sit a person down infront of a computer using windows and tell them go ahead a surf the web. They will look at you like you are kidding. You have to TRAIN them how to use the computer and training them in windows or linux makes NO difference...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (Another "I HATE WINBLOWZ") 2003-10-07
Anonymous (1 replies)
I agree. Although Windows is generally easier for people to learn because of its extensive use of a GUI, it still takes grandma's a long time to figure out how to use it.

It took my mom two months to figure out how to double click using only one hand. Can anybody beat that "helping mom" bit?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (Another "I HATE WINBLOWZ") 2003-10-15
Anonymous
Yeah, double clicking is a problem for my mom too. But no more, I put her on Linux and configured the desktop for single-click instead of double-click activation. Much better. I've never understood the reason for double-click anyway. Is that another MS innovation?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (Another "I HATE WINBLOWZ") 2003-10-07
Anonymous (2 replies)
LOL

You could have tried uninstalling the patch - its very easy. Rebuilding is always a last resort. There are also MANY things you can do in recovery mode before rebuilding.

I'm always hearing people complain about the problems they have after installing patches, but yet I had NEVER had one s...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-07
Anonymous
Why should I have to be in recovery mode?

I administer a handful of machines running 50% windows and 50% unix variants. I have never had to re-install a unix/linux based system or have unrecoverable errors. I have re-installed windows several times because of file corruption (with no viruses) a...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (Another "I HATE WINBLOWZ") 2003-10-08
Anonymous
"I'm always hearing people complain about the problems they have after installing patches, but yet I had NEVER had one single issue... do you people go along with these stories just because the media likes to blow them out of proportion?"

I run a small network of 100 Windows computers and Microso...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (Another "I HATE WINBLOWZ") 2003-10-08
Anonymous
Quite Right, My Father 61 has now been using Linux (Libranet 2.8) for 3 months and loves it (using the gnome desktop).

He is happy that he can safely browse the net and dosn't have a gazillion things installing and running on his PC, all the while not knowing how to stop them or how they got the...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (Another "I HATE WINBLOWZ") 2003-10-08
Krysalisk
>...and disabled internet access for her...

Did you mean AOL or proprietary TCP/IP stack for access? I never encountered that with any service pack.

But putting your mother in the front of shell prompt was a nice solution. Mine refused to learn even Outlook......

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (Another "I HATE WINBLOWZ") 2003-10-12
Anonymous
"I totally disagree with this article."

How funny: I totally disagree with you.

"This person is just like those other kids on irc that go on bashing windows and think they are "uberly leet" that they use Linux. Without the different versions of MS Windows released, Linux wouldn't be where it...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
I think you actually need to use both operating systems before before you report.

1) CHMOD needs root privileges to overwrite system files. NO matter how bad the script can be, the OS won't be affected (except Lindows)

2) Outlook does not execute but Outlook Express does. Still. Kmail and...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
>3) Windows does not force people to run as >Administrator but it IS necessary to install >most applications - JUST LIKE LINUX. Quite >contrary to your rant, when you create new >users in Windows XP the default level of >permissions is "Standard User", not >administrator. Only the initial account is...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
Its obvious that you are ignorant. Linux operating system aren't more user friendly when logged on as ROOT. Obviously you think Linux users are like ignorant Windows users who feel free to install and remove software just because they can. What is happening is pandering to the lowest common deno...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous (1 replies)
> "Windows does not force people to run as Administrator but it IS necessary to install most applications - JUST LIKE LINUX"

You don't really believe this do you? Other than the system vendor supplied updates and packages and some key basic optional system level software and tools very little ne...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
hmm... 2003-10-07
Anonymous (2 replies)
You can install stuff not as root? hmm... sounds like a really easy way to spread a virus. Too bad there simply are not enough *nix boxes out there yet. Your day will come though....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
hmm? 2003-10-07
Penguinisto (2 replies)
Dunno how else to say it, but you will be waiting for a long time until that day comes.

An exploit that allows root access will be extremely hard to build (too many people may not use that particular bit of code in their machine's kernel settings), and even harder to propagate.

For the user-l...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
hmm? 2003-10-08
Anonymous (1 replies)
I agree, we will, because Linux will never have enough market share for a virus to spread.

It's a piece of crap, and everybody knows it. It's not ready for the corporate world....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
hmm? 2003-10-15
Penguinisto
If you say so. Of course, a whole lot of Fortune 500 companies think you're howling into empty wind, but...


...naah. no sense in feeding Yet Another Anonymous Troll, is there? ;)
...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
hmm? 2003-10-08
Krysalisk (1 replies)
Given the fact that user's sensitive documents should be accessible to the user, given the fact that his signature is trusted by a group of individuals that are clueful to the exactly same extent as he is...

May be, just may be, the user should learn? And listen to the sysadmin?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
hmm? 2003-10-15
Penguinisto
Perhaps, but the system itself is left alone, and I strongly suspect that word of an infection will easily outpace the spread of this hypothetical infected file.

I never said it was impossible, but by comparison to Windows, the spread of such a file on an *ix network would be far, far slower, an...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
hmm... 2003-10-07
Anonymous
you didn't understand a thing. yes you can in linux install something not being root but only in the directories you are allowed to write - i.e. your home directory, nothing in the system. so if the program is fucked it will only distroy my user invironment, not the system. easy and secure - isn't i...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
How Interesting 2003-10-08
Sigmund Einstein
A Latin anagram for 'Microsoft"

ficto mors 'death maker'

...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2005-09-20
Chris
Thats prepostorous. Your view of
"The premise that Linux is more secure because a user has to go through more gyrations to execute the attachment. Once users are taught how to do this, then they will go right on spreading the virus just like in the MS world. ." is complete BS, they can't spread ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2007-09-19
boogieboarder97@aim.com
people only attack windows computers is because they hate micro$oft and there are o many security exploits im sure that most hackers use linux so their computer doesnt get infected with their on viruses...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-02
Anonymous (8 replies)
Your article has some correct assertations about the inherent insecurities of the Windows environment, but you act 'as if' the Linux environment is instantly the ultimately secure savior of computing.

There are plenty of 'insecure' Linux installations out there. Let me go grab my Red Hat 6.2 CD a...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Joe Hill (1 replies)
Both of your comments miss the entire point of the article.

The author is debunking the MYTH that Windows is attacked more successfully because of it's share of the market, or because it is chosen for attack because it is a "big target".

This is in fact not the case, as the article quite right...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-15
Anonymous
Hey, basement boy, it's me again! Just in case you did not have the education to know it, it was not Scotty who said that "security is a process", it was his hero Brucey who said it. And nobody missed the point of the article. If we needed a point, all we have to do is look at the top of your tin...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
RTFA 2003-10-03
Anonymous
Did you just read the first paragraph or something?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
ob3wan
I think this article is talking about a type of virus which could only be executed by executing the email attachment.

It is sure that nowadays more and more viruses are exploiting vulnerabilities.

And that kind of virus can exist for every OSes....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous
But we are talking about the average Window user versus the average Linux user. Linux users will know how to play in Windows, not vice versa. Security by obscurity? Sure.

I just hope that the Microsoft eyes that observe this take heed and start making serious efforts to change the way Windows w...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous
First, I would like to say that I am a Linux sysadmin and user. I agree with the two posters that the people who use the systems are the problem. Linux users can still login as root and install malicious software, and it is definitely not immune to worms that take advantage of privileged services....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous
A few comments to a previous post:
- RedHat 6.2 is a bad example. It is like talking about Windows 98. It is history. 6.2 had a lot of running services enabled by default, which needed to be turned off. If you read any online manuals, you should have known how to do it.
- If we look at a general v...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
>>Let me go grab my Red Hat 6.2 CD and install it as a default installation. How long before I am rooted?


1. You'll be glade that that old staff will still run on your current P4 4G monster.

2. How about giving you a Win2K or Win98 CD and go a default installation? I bet you will have no luc...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-08
Anonymous
"Let me go grab my Red Hat 6.2 CD and install it as a default installation."

You go girl! Get your RedHat 6.2 CD??!! Here is another response that should be moderated out but here goes!

WTF! Go download RedHat 9.0 and get current! Unless you don't know how to get Redhat 9.0 and you need to buy...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (4 replies)
I have to ask, how did this guy get a job writing for SecurityFocus.com? If this is an example of what symantec is going to do, this site is going to lose it's usefulness for anything except a quick way to read bugtraq.

My favorite quote from the article "Further, due to the strong community aro...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-04
Anonymous
I believe the monoculture analogy was based on the recent paper--CyberInsecurity: The Cost of Monopoly -- How the Dominance of Microsoft Products Poses a Risk to Security.

I recommend reading it....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-04
John Wilson
Oh little troll, how lacking in the wisdom and beauty of the Zen of computing.

Please take a seat and try to listen.

My own experience in the Linux community has been a good one, outside of the odd RTFM rely. But, grasshopper, the FM is there and free, unlike the unhelpful help files offered...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
Good work you picked up on two sentences that were somewhat vague, completely neglected to talk about any thing related to the subject of the article. At least the collection of malcontents above were criticising it for reasons related to its content not on the quality of its prose.

Thanks for y...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2006-06-13
Anonymous
What he refures to is that windows uses a "monolitic strtucture" witch means that almost ewery program in the operating system is integrated with other programs. This is the reason why a patch for let say internet explorer may brake something else in the system like the filemanager or something else...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Troll Food 2003-10-03
Anonymous (3 replies)
Granneman is a tool. Google for him on groups, and you'll see that just a few short years ago, he was trying to get help on how to get his laptop to suspend- on Windows. Now he is formost expert on Linux? Who does this clown think he is? He presumes to preach to us about how Linux will save the w...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Troll Food 2003-10-03
Efrén
Wow! The BIG difference is he already KNOWS what he's talking about, what about you? What are you doing to enhance your own life instead bother someone else?

Greetz from Guadalajara, México.

Efrén.

P.S. Time of study is not the same than time of lack. You got it?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Troll Food 2003-10-03
Anonymous
LOL - yeah, didn't you know - when you install SuSE 8.0 on your laptop using the nice automagically installing gui, you automagically become a linux expert?

Like most kids out there I guess. Adults should know better....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Troll Food 2003-10-03
Joe Hill (1 replies)
Soooo, you found *one* example, and one in which he was having trouble with Windows...

and this is somehow a counterpoint to his article? LOL!

Okay, first of all, he never used the phrase, or even implied, that "Linux is going to save the world". In fact, quite the opposite.

Once again, in ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Troll Food 2003-10-15
Anonymous (1 replies)
Joe Hill? Is that the best you could do on a fake name? Nice try Scott. You are still a tool.

Oh, and BTW, it was not "just one" example, there are many. Like other's pointed out, even the King of Tools, Scott (you), use "Windoze" as the OS. Man, you are sad.

And I don't have to find "a ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Troll Food 2006-01-10
Anonymous
Typical reply from someone who has had their entire argument torn to shreds....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (1 replies)
Hey kids, look, this article pretty much spells it out. But, hurdles for users will be overcome and they'll still wreck parts of their systems by pulling bonehead stunts.

What was mentioned but not brought out as the cornerstone of the security differences is this: the very basic design of Windo...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses -- "windoze"? 2003-10-03
Anonymous (2 replies)
Your use of the 'windoze' is evidence of your maturity level. Your argument means nothing now, its useless. Oh but wait, I think you missed the "M$" somewhere in there.

Guys, please keep the Secfocus discussions pollution free and professional, these words belong on ZDNet....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses -- "windoze"? 2003-10-03
Anonymous
"Your use of the 'windoze' is evidence of your maturity level. Your argument means nothing now, its useless. Oh but wait, I think you missed the "M$" somewhere in there."

Yeah but your spelling flame means "your argument means nothing now". That cancels your cancel, so the original is still good....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses -- "windoze"? 2003-10-08
Anonymous
You forgot to add to the end of your comments how many Windows and Linux boxes YOU manage!

Why is it that the not so intelligent remarks end with NO proof of experience. Maybe beacuse you have none?

HOW MANY WINDOWS AND LINUX BOXES DO YOU MANAGE?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous
Mono culture or not, personally I think it are the users that should be educated and been brought aware of the risks of having hardware connected to the Internet....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (2 replies)
The main problem is NOT the default setting. I don't know a single Windows Admin who doesn't use an administrative account for running his desktop. As a longtime unix user (17+ years) I asked them why and was told 'it's too complicated to switch back and forth' and 'some things still don't work'. Th...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous
I am a Windows administrator and domain admin for my company. I run my box as a completely unpriv'd user. 'Runas' works fine for me when I need higher privs. If installing software I will logout and come back as an Administrative user.

Servers - yeah I log into them using my domain admin account,...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-08
Krysalisk
A fresh idea here: how about the user will _not_ know about any administrative accounts? As opposed to users' education...

Otherwise:
- I am not a highest authority on my cumpooter?

I had a VP user that insisted on having supervisor's password on the NetWare server, so he can monitor "what th...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous :) (1 replies)
Macro Viruses for any producivity suites will spread irrespective of the platform, as they're application dependent.

In the main Linux does offer better security against malicious code threats because of
user segmentation (e.g. user v's root) and also processes running with "least privilages" (e...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
"I write this in Mozilla running on Redhat 9 (patched via RHN), I migrated from Windoze last year, and I have to say it's been very peaceful!"

I have to admit one thing I REALLY love about Linux. When you hear about all those MS virii and worms and just look at all your emails and go, cool, some...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Bart
Hardening Linux is more easy to do than on Windows systems. Yes I've done MCSE and yes I'v done RHCE and yes Windows looks nice and easy to install. BUT Linux is more transparent, easy to harden and flexible to manage.
Since Linux is Open (you know as in Open Source) several brilliant software deve...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (1 replies)
While this column is right about virus threats, it is not in my opinion for worms. An apache-worm on linux spreads as fast as one on IIS. For viruses this is not true indeed.
hc...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-04
Mark Jensen
quote
"While this column is right about virus threats, it is not in my opinion for worms. An apache-worm on linux spreads as fast as one on IIS. For viruses this is not true indeed."
/quote

Well, yes - at a one-to-one comparison... But there have been ORDERS OF MAGNITUDES more worms on IIS tha...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (2 replies)
Based on the first two responses, I think this article was mostly debunked as another piece of MS hate mail. However, I think there are some comments that can be explored further.

Linux is the underdog in terms of client machines in the world. We all love the underdog, we want to see them win. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-04
Anonymous
Just a note about your business users and managers these days.

Most medium and large companies I know of will not allow Jim Manager and Jane Employee install their own OS or software. That is left to the "IT" people, sadly most often MSCEs, to do who it is hoped will harden the computer.

No, ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-09
M10
"It takes someone with a decent understanding of computers to setup and use a Linux workstation. When we make it easier to do that, we will also have to sacrifice security for usability. A user does not want to go through 5 steps to look at an attachment and if you think about it in business terms...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (1 replies)
I find your article lacking in reality. as an example:

Further, due to the strong community around Linux, new users will receive education and encouragement in areas such as email security that are currently lacking in the Windows world, which should help to alleviate any concerns on the part of...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2006-01-10
Anonymous
"The average computer user does not want to go through hours and hours of education to use there [sic] computer."

Which is what they should have to do before they are allowed to connect it to the internet.

"If you have not noticed lately there are as many exploits in Linux as any other platfor...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-03
Ken H (1 replies)
Briefly: I work in Junior NetAdmin/Help Desk role and I have a lot of face time with end users & security on both Win & Linux systems.

I agree with the author's premise that a monoculture is extremely bad, and I have read the recent article by Daniel Geer and I generally agree with it. The autho...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-03
Anonymous (2 replies)
Wrong.

Ximian Desktop and Suse Pro are already making serious inroads into the enterprise desktop market, and that is only two examples.

Entire national, regional, and local governments are exploring, if not adopting or even mandating alternatives to MS, specifically Linux-based solutions.

...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-04
Ken H (3 replies)
I realize other countries have been exploring the packages you mentioned. But you've apparently not tried to work with them AND true Office products at the same time. Despite advertisements, they are not 100% interoperable, and therefore might as well be incompatible altogether. If you've ever wo...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-06
Catalina Thunders
Your information is out of date, I use O.O.Calc on an everyday basis on a client's Excel files & Writer on his Word files, *never* a glitch or even a compromise.

Linux will inevitebly replace Windows in many business environments, the cost & security benefits have been common knowledge for some ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-07
Rick P
I am sorry that you have not spent enough time with computers to remember that once WordPerfect was the only product to use the same was true for Lotus 123/dbase xx and Ventura. Even Microsofts own product Word which was a DOS product needed for the Customer end to reschool with the first role out ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-08
Krysalisk
I tried OpenOffice and StarOffice as a replacement for MSO twice, on _very_ sympatetic and _very_ patient users. No macros interoperability (Word, Excel), no easy graphs, no simple access to the databases.

Give me 30% of _patient_ out of overall user base, I'll do wonders. Give me one stupid bigw...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-08
Anonymous (6 replies)
"Entire national, regional, and local governments are exploring, if not adopting or even mandating alternatives to MS, specifically Linux-based solutions."

Evidence? What planet are you living on? Not this one apparently.

Are you talking little places like S. Korea? Ohhh no! SOME German govt. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-08
Ken H
Alright, I get all of your points. And yes, I too used WordPerfect in the day; my College professors wouldn't accept any other file format. And I am aware of the other countries and the EU exploring options.

But my point here is simply that I don't believe the Linux desktop and its current supp...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-09
JoeHill
ROTFLMAO!

Very funny, terrorists and script kiddies, eh?

You seriously gotta work on your troll routine, it's kinda weak......

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-09
Anonymous
I guess Ford Motor Company is right in there with Osama, then:

http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/linux/story/0
,10801,85223,00.html?SKC=home85223...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-09
Haywire
Looks like California is in league with the terrorists too:

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-949241.html...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2003-10-15
Anonymous
What about California Goverment and their move to use Linux?

However it is true: Not many goverments like the fact that they cannot examine code on which they run their software. It is not matter of being US or anti US it is matter of feeling not being spied by corporate entity. I think is not o...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux will not succeed in replacing Windows at work because.. 2006-01-10
Anonymous
From what I hear Bin Laden used windows, so do most script kiddies.

Getting away from the Microsoft software filled with backdoors for American spy agencies seems like a pretty good thing to do for any country other than the US as well as any buisness that might happen to be competing with a US b...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
vs. ?? 2003-10-03
Anonymous
Since when do virusses battle out against each other ?

And who keeps the score ?

Or in short, a rant as rediculous as the title already suggests.

Stick to the facts, most people are already familiar with the prejudices.

Please...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Efrén
I take a text that you both, anonymous guys mad about the article, should have readed already:

"So when you use Linux, you're not using a perfectly safe OS. ...Linux and Mac OS X establish a more secure footing than Microsoft Windows ... nothing is immune to human gullibility and stupidity."

T...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (2 replies)
1) please don't grab your RH 6.2 CD. Or do you need the nostalgy? Use something uptodate :-)
2) about the number of bugs in Linux in past few years. Don't mention bugs in SSH, SSL, bind, etc. if we are talking about email client security. If user installs some linux distro with some mailer, he does...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Brian
"An I doub, if I install email-reading-workstation with linux/kmail/evolution/what evere, it will be wery hard to get that pc rooted/somehow other hacked. "

Hmmm. Have you used Pine lately? :)...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (1 replies)
I always thought the *nix attitude towards upgrading was "I shouldn't have to upgrade all the time, I want to keep what I've been running for 100 years". But when Windows users say "Get off of Win98! It's old!" you guys all say "They shouldn't have to!".

Hipocrates....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-04
John Wilson
Well, I suppose we'd be hypocrits if we were guilty of what you accuse us of being.

The reality is that *Nix folks upgrade all the time. It's fairly painless, in most cases and doesn't even require that annoying reboot that's so common on Microsoft products for it to take hold. The exception,...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
uofis
Well i agree with the first reply, and i just add that linux is powerfull and stable, when a problem happen you have to waste a lotof time to fix it, and wwe know that linux can do things that microsoft cannot do, good BUT that's mean also a linux virus can do more damage it's OS then a win virus...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous
As a die hard MCSE I have to give credit for a well written presentation of the facts. I have been branching out to Linux and Free-BSD over the past year and really like the OS's. I do not feel Linux is ready for the 'prime time' corporate desktop but for the techie it's a great way to go. I use ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous
Nice to read from the Windows-adepts that as of today we won't see those massive amounts of worms and viruses anymore.
On your todo-list, 10.000 machine-international-AD-network-manager:

spread the word of how to solve this silly problem with 2 mouse clicks in your mmc, and spread it to all of ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Why this article SUCKS 2003-10-03
Anonymous (2 replies)
The author came up with some good facts comparing Viruses on Windows to Linux but he forgot on important aspect.

Most Windows users are computer novices and unaware of the many ways their machine can become infected. This makes it easier for a coder to write a script that compromizes their system...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Why this article SUCKS -NOT. 2003-10-06
Bob James - Pentar InfoSystems
The "unsavvy" Windows users might be just as "unsavvy" on a Linux machine, and yet they would be unable to cause the damage to that machine for *exactly* the reasons stated in the article. Primarily, because the construction of Linux prevents a regular user from doing things that will cause such dam...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Why this article SUCKS 2003-10-07
Anonymous (1 replies)
RTFA. God, I'm so sick of stupid people like yourself. You are actually supporting the article and you don't even know it.

Yes, the average Windows user is a novice and M$ knows this. This means that OTB Windows should have defaults conformed for the user to protect them.

You say that the u...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Why this article SUCKS 2003-10-08
Anonymous (1 replies)
"M$ should make those defaults and if the user wants it more insecure, then that's up to the user."

M*S* has done that with Windows 2003, enhanced security configuration.

Next....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Why this article SUCKS 2003-10-08
Krysalis
Marketing Manager (two-levels higher than you on the food chain):
- My friend just sent me this cute screensaver, and your stupid antivirus stopped it from installing. Install it now!
You:
- Yes, sir!

Guess, who got blamed? Riiight....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous (1 replies)
ok im going to say this because its becoming a big flame war. 1) I dont care what your gripe is with the author or windows vs. linux. He said it best in my opinion when he mentioned "Security is, as we all know, a process, not a product." thats right its up to the user to secure his/her own box. But...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-04
Anonymous
"But if you think about it, linux does take better precautions naturally when it comes to security such as having a root and username system and usually warning the user to use user instead of root"

Oh, yeah, Lindows does a great job of this....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Think OpenBSD, Linux and cia are much more SECURE ! 2003-10-03
Anonymous (1 replies)
Oh, infosecs, think a bit on it...
Which system do you think will be rooted before? OpenBSD Desktop or Win?
When its hacked, which will you ever know it?
When will be the patch released for that vulnerabily?

I had written some unix elf viruses, and it's just FAST IMPOSSIBLE to propagate like i...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Think, yet another troll. 2003-10-06
Anonymous (4 replies)
Excuse me? I would never know?

I monitor all of my processes, services, open ports, event logs, iis logs, dns logs, ftp logs, urlscan logs, virus logs all centrally from one mmc console. I also run tripwire locally and snort for the perimeter and have various scripts which search out attempted in...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Not quite 2003-10-06
Anonymous
I think what he was saying is that since he is using an open solution he can, and apparently has, audited the code himself. He has no need to monitor in that fashion because he knows what the system is doing without having to keep an eye on it constantly. I seem to remember a few years ago a back ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Think, yet another troll. 2003-10-06
Anonymous
You are the exception, not the rule. MS makes it easy for just about anyone to "administer" a system which is not necessarily a bad thing. But many of the MS "administrators" I run into don't even manage their logs let alone reviewing them regularly.

I truly wish that more MS Admins were like...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Think, yet another troll. 2003-10-07
Anonymous
You can sourround yourself with as much protective software as you want. Once someone's in you lose, regardless OS, if they're dedicated. Of course I reinstall my OpenBSD box, apps and all, fresh in 10 minutes but that's another matter...

Maybe it doesn't matter if you're a network administrator,...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Yes, but you are a NERD 2003-10-07
Hellcat (2 replies)
You are a nerd, and most people are not nerds. Most people just want a computer that helps them read email and communicate with others without blowing up. Most small biz does not care to spend their days monitoring processes and logs, nor should they be required to. My car and my toaster are both...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Yes, but you are a NERD ---- uh, no, I do my job. 2003-10-08
Anonymous
"Most small biz does not care to spend their days monitoring processes and logs, nor should they be required to."

And it's that attitude which has lead to the vast insecurity of most business networks out there.
I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly would not hire an administrator that...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Yes, but you are a NERD 2003-10-08
Krysalisik
If you are an admin that does not want to check the logs - your future is dim, "...for you are crispy and good with stuffing".

If you are a user - leave it to your nerd, honor her (Pamela, are you here?)and feed well. You should not be reading this, in the first place.

Oh, I see your IP addres...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
UNIX worms (RTM aka. The Great Worm) 2003-10-03
Anonymous (1 replies)
Some of the OE viruses are worms. There are no wiedspread UNIX/Linux viruses, but there were some widespread UNIX worms (like the infamous rtm worm) which made Internet unusable, just like OE viruses/worms nearly did....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
UNIX worms (RTM aka. The Great Worm) 2003-10-03
Anonymous
"Some of the OE viruses are worms. There are no wiedspread UNIX/Linux viruses, but there were some widespread UNIX worms (like the infamous rtm worm) which made Internet unusable, just like OE viruses/worms nearly did."

That was 1988!

http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/spafford88internet.html

IIRC,...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-03
Anonymous


"Further, due to the strong separation between normal users and the privileged root user,
our Linux user would have to be running as root to really do any damage to the system."

Nix Systems have an extra security measure a user can configure sudo so it denies the
attacker root even if he c...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
I think you're being short sighted 2003-10-03
Anonymous (1 replies)
While you article is generally accurate for today, it fails to take one thing into account. Viruses mutate. Hackers become better at what they do. What seems difficult today, becomes trivial tomorrow.

I think the major flaw in your argument comes from one simple statement you made:

"But eve...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
I think you're being short sighted 2003-10-05
Anonymous
Very good point. All through reading these responses my thought was, if Linux or Mac were as popular and prolific as Windows systems are then the "bad hackers" would spend much more time creating exploits for these systems. As it is the payback for creating an exploit for a Linux or Mac system is so...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Scott's web server runs Windows 2000 2003-10-04
Anonymous (1 replies)
Scott's website (www.granneman.com) as well as the employer's website (www.bryanconsulting.com) both run Windows 2000.
Both websites can be checked using uptime.netcraft.com

Reference:
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.granneman.com

Reference:
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Scott's web server runs Windows 2000... LOL 2003-10-06
Anonymous
That is pretty funny.

Just reaffirms the fact that he wrote this article for no other reason but to spark his ratings - too bad it backfired....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Sobig.F isn't a virus -- it's a worm 2003-10-04
Anonymous
Some security expert -- confusing virii and worms.

worm - self replicating program

virus - self replicating program that hides inside other programs...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-04
Anonymous (2 replies)
I guarantee there is a covert conspiracy by micro$oft to create a virus to affect Linux. In response to the person with the claim of 1000+ users on a windows system with AD.
Any problem, no matter how small usally corrupts AD. Novell is a much better choice for user managment. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
huh? 2003-10-07
Anonymous
"Any problem, no matter how small usally corrupts AD"

Where in gods name did you get that idea?

That has got to be the stupidest thing I have ever read before. You win the cookie for my lifetime....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-08
Krysalisk
Just my 2 pennies:
- A question: "virii" or "viruses"? Grammatically correct "virii", but I've got ridiculed everytime...
- A correction: there's no such a thing as Novell. The OS is NetWare, it's their marketing dept. that calls itself "Novell". Everybody hunging it on NetWare forums knows it. ("...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-04
Anonymous
This dude is still wrting for security focus.
Hell, every time he writes he just gets bad reviews. This guy mentioned "social engieneering" how can he talk about that when he couldnt even trouble shoot his way out of a paper bag....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Lindows 2003-10-04
Anonymous
Just take a look. it's a future of linux - future of viruses...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-05
Anonymous
I just finished reading your article, and like so many others before you, its clear you feel that technology can be blamed for stupidity.

?after all, nothing is immune to human gullibility and stupidity?

The average computer user, that put Microsoft at the top, would rather leave their compute...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-05
Anonymous
yet another discussion about *nix vs. windows.

1. linux is far from perfect but goes huge steps towards it.

2. windows is far from perfect too, but most users are willing to accept this.

I'm a *nix and windows beginner, but i don't understand why people use *nix OR windows, use both and see...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
mail client exploit + local root exploit = just as bad as if you were root anyway. 2003-10-05
AlphaParticle (1 replies)
I imagine the could be an email virus for *nix with an array of root exploits for various platforms, which would allow infection of local files.

All it would take would be a client exploit that executes a script contained in the mail.

Analyzing the headers in the mailbox could make it possible...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
mail client exploit + local root exploit = just as bad as if you were root anyway. 2003-10-07
Anonymous
Possible...maybe, likely... no.

To exploit a local root exploit from a mail client you would have to have a mail client that reads your mail as a script that has system call privileges. Since most clients only treat mail as text and do nothing with it but display it, you would actually see the ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Jeff@aeonworx.com (2 replies)
There are a number of flaws in the article. Most have these have been pointed out, but I'll reiterate:

1.Humans are convenience driven. A 'normal' user will soon get fed up of the saving, changing perms scenario and once they discover root perms they just use those instead.

2. By default in a ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
>>I use WinXP/BeOS/Linux on my machine
>>but after a decent search on the net I haven't found any of these tools that target Linux as it's base O/S.

You said enouth for yourself, neither a good Linux user nor a good researcher. The worst is that you don't know much about computer security yet pr...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-07
Anonymous
as per your first argument about the "normal" user not wanting to go through the trouble of saving, chmoding, and executing.

This can be both right and wrong, it depends how the umask is set. Even if you're root, you may still have to go through all the steps. The only difference is that you ma...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
After readying most of of comments and the articles, I think both side have come points but also misses some common sense.

I disagree partially of what the article said about Windows is easier to be hacked than other OSes. The article give me the impression that windows user can do dump things ea...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux is still more secure, even if you're always logged in as root 2003-10-06
kevinh
The only possible conclusion is that "Yes, the internet would benefit from more people using Linux or OS X". Will there be more viruses written for operating systems other than Windows? Absolutely. But simply saying that "More viruses will be written for Linux" doesn't directly mean that any will...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous
I feel some reasons for linux not being a bug ridden OS still:

1. Usually Linux users are techies and well informed on Computer ins and outs
2. Few Linux users
3. Few virus authors
4. Linux has fewer enemies than Windows hehe..


Also keep seeing, one day MS will fund in underground to writ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-06
Anonymous (2 replies)
The main reason Microsoft OE and Outlook are vulnerable is because the average home user knows nothing about security. They could easily stop all virus attacks by installing a firewall like BlackIce and enable the Application protection and virus software that autoupdates. But as a user myself I get...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Windows auto update for XP 2003-10-07
Anonymous
Don't get me wrong, I in no way advocate the use of Windows but like many I am stuck with it at work and home (at home I dual boot xp and Redhat). I dial up to my ISP from home and hate updating all at once. I found that Windows XP has an auto update feature that will search for updates and downlo...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2006-01-10
Anonymous
If Microsoft had actually designed their products for security there would be no need for windows computers to be firewalled....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Lifelong Windows/Linux user switches to MacOS X 2003-10-06
Anonymous
A good friend of mine who develops web/database apps using custom middleware recently got fed up with the hassle needed to keep his Windows and Linux boxes secure -- time taken away from his main activity, which is software development. So what does he do when his Sony VAIO laptop gets stolen in a P...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses - easy way out 2003-10-06
Greg
I have a home network, 3 desktops and a server(firewall).
My kids (9 and 12) use a dual boot Redhat/XD2 and Win98 setup.
All internet access via windows is disabled so its used to play games only, and all surfing email etc is done under linux and they have no problems at all.
My (computer illeter...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
EDITOR: Please be more aware of sexist pronouns 2003-10-07
Pamela (2 replies)
Please note that it is inappropriate to, for example, refer to the main login holder of a Windows XP platform as a "he".

This kind of pronoun useage is a shock and dismay to see in this day & age.

Alienated,

Pamela...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
EDITOR: Please be more aware of sexist pronouns 2003-10-07
Womyn hater (2 replies)
Sweety, there is no gender neutral singular pronoun in the english language, so please shut up....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
EDITOR: Please be more aware of sexist pronouns 2003-10-08
Anonymous
Sounds like a Linux guy attacking a woman because he can't compensate his insecurity with his OS (or, perhaps other things)....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
EDITOR: Please be more aware of sexist pronouns 2003-10-08
Anonymous
nice..thanks had a good laugh :)...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
EDITOR: Please be more aware of sexist pronouns? 2003-10-07
Anymouse (1 replies)


If you are insulted that easily how in the world do you survive in the harsh world of IT security? I am very curious and this is an honest question: What should the writer have called the login holder?
She? It? the human?

Are you fair and do you hammer on female writers that always use "she?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
EDITOR: Please be more aware of sexist pronouns? 2003-10-08
leavetheworldabetterplacethanyoufoundit (1 replies)
'They' is the perfectly normal, grammatical way to be non-gender specific.

As in: 'When a person writes a potent virus they are likely to disrupt a lot of other people's lives.'

Pamela is on the money....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
EDITOR: Please be more aware of sexist pronouns? 2003-10-08
Krysalisk
>Pamela is on the money...

If I'll start to refer to every user as "she", given the collection of PEBCAK stories I got, the ladies between us will be more offended....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses: Absurd arguments 2003-10-07
Anonymous
Sorry Mr. Granneman, your arguments are really absurd. First you say, we who think it's not it's nature but it's widespread use and therefore more damage potential for attackers are all wrong. And to prove that, you say a main reason for Linux to be safer is, that there are so many different mail cl...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-07
Anonymous
Hellooo

Linux is linux, like opensource software, if something is wrong, you could see from the source tree. In a few days will be rectified.
Windows could not do that. Come on people defending Windows, is a step or more back to linux and generally opensource projects .......

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Market -vs- Security 2003-10-07
Anonymous (1 replies)
I have been reading these responses and I can tell you that I believe we are all misunderstanding each other.

Many of you claim that Windows is less secure by design which I wholehartedly agree with. However, the problem with this argument is that is WHY linux is not dominating the desktop space....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Market -vs- Security 2003-10-07
Anonymous
I wonder, in an open-source world, would market-share domination really be an issue. It doesn't seem to be disputed that monoculture is bad for security, and yet the main argument in favor of it depends on believing that market-share dominance should be a goal. Can the world continue to function ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Mac OS X = 0 2003-10-07
Anonymous (1 replies)
The article has grouped Mac OS 7/8/9 with Mac OS X to say around 40 viruses, but only talks in terms of Mac OS X. Please correct the article to talk about Mac OS X having exactly 0 viruses....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Mac OS X = 0 2003-10-07
Wendy Piggsflye
If my dusty memory databanks serve me, the vast majority of those "40" Mac viruses were either infections in a "Hypercard stack" or in the pre- System 7 Desktop file. Hypercard was (is?) a wonderful little programing application where you could add sounds, pictures, databases, whatever, into your d...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Mac OS X et. al.: Additional Perspective 2003-10-07
Carlos
===
I have posted this in a few forums before, so understand it was written in a particular context. Originally on 9/19 in dealmac. It echoes some of the above article and adds a bit more.

I do not, however, agree that the Linux community (nor the Mac OS X community) will hold your hand on gett...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Scott's Right, Microsofties. Deal With It. 2003-10-07
Penguinisto (2 replies)
Seriously, all pokes and prods aside:

When it comes to viruses (not exploits, not pen tools, but viruses), Linux, other *ix, and OSX/OS9 are tops in prevention of propagation. So perhaps Microsoft may want to take a good hard look at why it is they get infected so hard, and by such huge proportio...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Scott's Wrong, Microlovers. Deal With linux being babies 2003-10-08
Anonymous (2 replies)
Unfortunately Mr. Scott failed to say why windows is being attacked by so many viruses. What do crackers try to do when they make a virus?? The answer is they do try to do as much damage as possible!! And what OS will the occumplish this?? Its Windows of course because windows is on over 90% of the ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
If you actually RTFM'd... 2003-10-09
Penguinisto
LOL! He did cover that pathetic " *snif!* we don't suck! it's just that Windows is more popular!" whine, and stomped it flat.

Deal with it.

I got more bad news for you... popularity is no excuse for crappy coding practices, and Windows is a nice shining example of putting marketing above codi...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Scott's Wrong, Microlovers. Deal With linux being babies 2006-01-10
Anonymous
So that brings up the question of why all those big corporations that lock their computers down well are using linux? Could it be because they know you to be wrong?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Scott's Right, Microsofties. Deal With It. 2003-10-08
Anonymous (2 replies)
Hey wait a minute, I've seen that "/P" on ZDNet before, and your posts are not as "mature" as you like to pretend you are on SecFocus... uh oh, busted !!!

Probably because they have 0 moderation...

(perhaps I should post a few of your anti-MS flames?) ... I bet Blacklight's opinion of you woul...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
I'm famous now? 2003-10-09
Penguinisto
Yes, I do play around on ZDNet, my dear Anonymous One ...and your point is what exactly? Petty attempts at insult, perhaps?

To refute your little insinuation of moderation, everything I've posted on SecFocus so far does show up. The mods have been nothing but kind to me here.

You see, there is...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
PS: Blacklight posts in both places too. 2003-10-09
Penguinisto
Just thought you'd like to know that ;)

/P...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Need Admin rights to run DirectX games ! 2003-10-08
Anonymous
Try running Microsoft's latest popular game "Age of Mythology" without giving the user Admin rights. It won't work ! Game came after XP release so it is not a legacy game but I am forced to give my 7 year old Admin rights on his account so he can play a game ! He can now go on the internet and sc...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs ARE a joke 2003-10-08
Anonymous (2 replies)
To the person that insists that that everyone that isn't MCSE certified is living in their mothers basement and doesn't have a job:

I have been working with Server OSes and networks for almost 20 years. I have a BS AND a BBA from the University of Wisconsin. I teach OS and network theory part t...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs ARE a joke 2003-10-08
Krysalisk (1 replies)
>...recently Novell...Solaris and Novell...

You are _not_ administering any of Novell servers, and probably never will, because:

/YELLING/
The OS is NetWare, the _company's_ name is Novell.
/END_YELLING/

You are not administering any Microsoft or Sun or RedHat servers, are you?...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs ARE a joke 2003-10-09
OS Agnostic
> by Krysalisk
> Oct 8 2003 7:46PM
>
>> ...recently Novell...Solaris and Novell...
>
> You are _not_ administering any of Novell servers, and probably never will, because [...] The OS is NetWare, the _company's_ name is Novell.
>
> You are not administering any Microsoft or Sun or RedHat...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
MCSEs ARE a joke 2003-10-09
Anonymous
That is very refreshing to hear! I'm a college grad with about 8 years experience managing Novell and Windows networks. No MCSE here... no CNE... Just a solid work ethic and an open mind. Where can I send a resume? :)...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
If Linux is so secure..... 2003-10-08
Anonymous (1 replies)
Maybe you guys can explain this to me; Why are so many Linux machines getting hacked?

http://213.219.122.11/en

Check out the Todays verified attacks on the right hand side. More days than not Linux is at the top of list. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
If Linux is so secure..... 2003-10-09
Anonymous (2 replies)
1. Those are *attacks*. Not exploits.
2. Most of the webservers on the internet run Apache, usually on some variant of *nix, which means they are more often subject to attack but
3. Less often subject to exploitation.

Nice try, been there, done that, bought the tee shirt... ;-)...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
If Linux is so secure..... 2003-10-09
Anonymous
1. Those are *attacks*. Not exploits.

??? They are website defacements. The hacker, or more likely script kiddie, managed to modify the files on the supposedly secure Linux server. Call it an *attack* or whatever you want, but I call it pretty $#%@&^% insecure.

I hope you're not trying to dis...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
If Linux is so secure..... 2003-10-10
Anonymous
These are web site defacements not DOS attacks. Which means the Hacker or script kiddie managed to gain access to the server and modify files. Any way you look at it, we are talking a security breech here.



...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Why not compare root exploits? 2003-10-09
modulus at modsgarage dot com
So, say we give *nix credit for not being as virus-susceptible as windows, which is not unreasonable..

This article proposes that an operating system that does not have an infamous viral history is somehow very secure.

Show me a windows vulnerability that allows a remote user to gain full admi...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-09
Anonymous
MCSEs are a joke.... although after their memorization excecises(studying for the tests) they could possibly be useful in storing data while real network admins do their job...:)...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-09
Anonymous
Doesn't make any sence....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-10
Anonymous
Mr. Granneman should not be the author to write this paper before he knows more about Linux. THis paper mislead people to beleive Linux is more secure than Windows or other System. It is totally wrong. This is the point from a beginner user, not EXPERT!

There is a will, there will be a road. If L...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
You failed to refute the statement 2003-10-11
Anonymous (1 replies)
"The only reason Microsoft software is the target of so many viruses is because it is so widely used! Why, if Linux or Mac OS X was as popular as Windows, there would be just as many viruses written for those platforms!"

I did not find anything you said that refutes the above. Do you really bel...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: You failed to refute the statement 2006-01-10
Anonymous
People who've seen the windows source code have used terms such as sloppy and amarturish to describe it.

Thus it would not suprise me if the quality of code in Linux is far superior than what Microsoft put out....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-11
McGeezer
The reason why Windows viruses are more popular than *nix viruses is because (and I regret to say this) Windows is much more popular than *nix.

Most people in the home have a computer and a TV these days, they arn't running Linux, they're running what they've seen on the TV - Micro$oft products. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2003-10-12
Paul Kosinski
I think that the various flavors of Unix tend to be more secure than Windows because of their origins.

Unix originated as a time-sharing system, and still is one. A primary goal of such a system is to *protect* users from one another. And Unix was not the first such system (cf. Multics, IBM T...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
The Achilles Heel of both... 2003-10-13
zer0*Kelvin (1 replies)
Scripts are the Anchilles Heel of Unix, Linux, and Windows systems of all flavors.

In IE, typing in a target script at the end of a url of any web page gives me the usename/password for all accounts on the server...no matter what OS it's running. Every browser available allows me to do this. With...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
The Achilles Heel of both... 2003-10-15
Anonymous
You are a complete idiot. Please go to GRC to post your totally stupid, completely inaccurate, childish FUD. Nothing of what you say is true, and you are a total tool. ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Bill Gates vs GM 2003-10-13
zer0*Kelvin
Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated;

"If GM had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon."

In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a pres...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Nobody argues using Windows as non-root 2003-10-15
Anonymous
Think out of the box! Why even windows administrators log on windows as "root"? Isn't it more secure to run windows without administrative priviledges? Well, why you do not use ordinary user on your windows box? Admit the reasons.

I bet if we here make research how many of windows users (NT kerne...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Microsoft RULZ 2003-10-15
Microsoft supporter (1 replies)
Unfortunately your statistical analysis fails to indicate the number of Linux users vs the number of linux exploits. It's quite obvious that Windows is targeted by virus authors alot more than other OS's.

MS will always rule the desktop market because they design apps for end-users and NOT for kn...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Microsoft RULZ 2007-01-04
Anonymous
Rhetoric lol, you gotta love it...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Thor Larholm has written a counterattack to this article... 2003-10-15
Anonymous (1 replies)
http://www.securityfocus.com/guest/23028

Much better....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Thor Larholm has written a counterattack to this article... 2006-03-30
My head is spinning (1 replies)
Here's my 2c on this. I manage a Small Business network running Windows 2003. No I do not have an MSCE, just a whole lot of experience. Since I"ve been here I've had to purchase 50+ PC's(P IV"s with 1GB ram min) to adequately run Windows XP SP2. I've also had to buy ISA firewall software and a ver...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Re: Thor Larholm has written a counterattack to this article... 2006-06-15
Anonymous (1 replies)
I think that Xandros is exactly what you are looking for but it will cost some money because its not a free version of linux but a commersal one although there are a free version to that can be downloaded by bit torrent but it is a striped down version
xandros will lanunc version 4.0 in the end of ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Re: Thor Larholm has written a counterattack to this article... 2006-11-24
Anonymous
I know this is an older comment by a few months, but I'd also like to point out that the above system admin has a variety of free choices that offer easy UI's. Mandriva, Ubuntu, Slackware, etc would fit the bill....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2006-06-08
Anonymous
Although I run both Linux and Windows, and I believe Linux to be the better operating system, the Windows OS (NT) shipped with security so tight, nobody was able to do anything with it..So, Microsoft opened it up. That's the reason the first user is the Administrator....

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2006-07-02
Blunts
Sure windows has mega vulnerabilities, and yes linux does too. What we are missing is that Linux or OSX, Free BSD, etc gives you a choice. There are no secure OS' out there, there never will be, but at least by the hard work of the members that make open source software free we have a CHOICE! So guy...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Lindows (linspire) 2007-02-22
Esnir
According to lindows (now linspire), only the prereleases of that distribution had root as default user.
That was because the application to manage users was not ready at that moment and lindows made root the default out of convenience.
The first release of lindows had a working user management, s...

[ more ]  [ reply ]
Linux vs. Windows Viruses 2009-03-10
Anonymous
I have used Microsoft Windows on many computers in the past and I was only logged into them under guest accounts. In spite of that fact, I still had pretty much free reign over the whole entire system. In other words I could install just about anything and I could make just about any modifica...

[ more ]  [ reply ]




 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2009, SecurityFocus