Actually it's bigot's like you that need to be educated - learn to READ.

1) Comparing the number of patches for a linux distro to the number of patches for a Microsoft O/S is like comparing apples to oranges. Check out http://www.gnu.org to find out what Linux really is and you'll see by that definition there are significantly fewer security patches for linux than MS. But this is irrelevant to the original article.

2) The article is not commenting one way or the other on whether or not Linux/*nix boxes are more secure or require fewer patches. He is however, highlighting the fact that the majority of inexperienced/uninformed internet users are using a Microsoft O/S and require assistance on making and keeping that O/S secure. Part of that needs to fall on Microsoft's shoulders - deliver a more secure O/S because of the lack of knowledge (averaged over all for your userbase) in your userbase. However, part also needs to fall on the security community if we want a healthy, functioning internet.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/193/23391#23391