Slashdot Mirror


WinInformant Says Windows More Secure Than Linux

nihilist_1137 excerpts from this WinInformant article, which reads in part: "For at least the first 8 months of 2001, open-source poster child Linux was far less secure than Windows, according to the reputable NTBugTraq, which is hosted by SecurityFocus, the leading provider of security information about the Internet. ... A look at the previous 5 years--for which the data is more complete--also shows that each year, Win2K and Windows NT had far fewer security vulnerabilities than Linux, despite the fact that Windows is deployed on a far wider basis than any version of Linux." I wonder how many sysadmins (Windows or Linux) would agree with this conclusion. Update: 02/04 16:54 GMT by T : Looks like the WinInfo site has gone down since the story was submitted, so you may have to content yourself in the meantime with the Bugtraq numbers. Update: 02/04 19:30 GMT by T :Several readers have pointed out that the conclusions WinInformant makes based on the Bugtraq data are not those of SecurityFocus; the headline has been changed accordingly.

1 of 876 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Lousy research by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 2, Flamebait

    If you were a regular reader of that site you'd notice that he does a fair amount of MS bashing when they deserve it. And he priases them when they deserve it. He does the same for Apple and Linux too! Unlike Slag-dot here where a middle of the road, honest observation is always treated with a -1 moderation.

    --
    Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!