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.
SecurityFocus Says Windows More Secure Than Linux
In related news, we've just sent flying swines down to Hell. Initial reports from Satan's lair indicate a cold front moving through.
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
If my understanding of shotguns is correct (I have fired them on several occasions so I'm not totally clueless), there are multiple types of shells, some are buckshot which are, like you pointed out, BBs; however they are smaller, greater in number, and exit the barrel with much higher velocity than air rifle BBs. There are so many, in fact, you can cut a 3 foot wide target in half with about 10 12-gauge shells at 15 foot range. Another type of shell is solid-load in which there is a single large projectile.