, 2003-04-27
With Windows Server 2003, Microsoft has finally produced an operating system that isn't begging to be hacked on the first boot.
Expand all |
Post comment
Secure by Default - READ BEFORE YOU POST.
2003-04-28
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Secure by Default - READ BEFORE YOU POST.
2003-04-28
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
Secure by Default - READ BEFORE YOU POST.
2003-04-29
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Secure by Default - READ BEFORE YOU POST.
2003-04-30
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Secure by Default - READ BEFORE YOU POST.
2003-05-01
Anonymous (3 replies)
Anonymous (3 replies)
Secure by Default - READ BEFORE YOU POST.
2003-05-02
Penguinisto (1 replies)
Penguinisto (1 replies)
Secure by Default, Insecure by Birth
2003-04-28
Drek Software Inc. (2 replies)
Drek Software Inc. (2 replies)
Well, I'll give you this much, Timster...
2003-04-28
Penguinisto (4 replies)
Penguinisto (4 replies)
Well, I'll give you this much, Timster...
2003-04-28
Anonymous (6 replies)
Anonymous (6 replies)
Well, I'll give you this much, Timster...
2003-04-29
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Well, I'll give you this much, Timster...
2003-04-29
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Zealotry comes in all forms.
2003-04-29
matt@beatlab.org (2 replies)
matt@beatlab.org (2 replies)
Secure by Default (Pathetic)
2003-04-29
Anonymous (3 replies)
Anonymous (3 replies)
Secure by Default
2003-04-29
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)

"Ignoring inconvenient facts"
YM the facts like parts of RH 9 have been out for much, much longer than a month? Or that unlike Win2k3, RH 9 is actually being used?
Also, vuln numbers don't tell the whole story - the proof lies in the actual number of exploits that have had any success... care to compare those numbers? (or even better, let's come back next year and count the two OSes against each other... that is, if you've got the cojones for it, Oh Anonymous One ;) )
Cheers,
/P
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/157/19793#19793