Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Reliance On MS A Danger To National Security

Posted by timothy on from the well-duh dept.

An anonymous reader writes "A panel of leading security experts Wednesday blasted Microsoft for vulnerabilities in its software, and warned that reliance on the Redmond, Wash.-based developer's software is a danger to both enterprises and national security." (Even OpenBSD might be bad if it was the only game in town.) M : The report (pdf) makes good reading.

8 of 465 comments (clear)

  1. Old Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    hehehe, that reminds me of an old joke:

    What do microsoft and timothy have in common?

    They both get their holes exploited daily!

    1. Re:Old Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Reminds me of the joke where 20 gay blacks all cum in Timothy's asshole and mouth ... oh wait, that wasn't a joke it was an AP story.

  2. Yes, like ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    ... those "secruity experts" woudl be soemthing other than Linux-fagots and Open Sorce hippies.

  3. Here we go again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    "Even OpenBSD might be bad if it was the only game in town"

    It never ceases to amaze me the blind faith Linux users (that's you, Timothy) put in OpenBSD. Time and again here at slashdot, all I hear is about how amazingly secure OpenBSD is.

    For crying out loud, and OS is only as secure as _you_.

    One argument is that "blah blah remote holes in the default install". What a load of marketing. An OS running virtually no services has no holes in the default install? I'm supposed to be impressed?

    Why not just use NetBSD which has zero services enabled by default? Surely they could say "No remote holes in the default install and nor will there ever be!".

    It comes down to you.

    And I'm sick of slashdot glorifying OpenBSD!

  4. Other OS's Much Better? by tarnin · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I'll probably get moded down to troll or flaimbait but really, how much better are any other OS? On the heels of the two OpenSSH and the sendmail exploit, this comes out. Arn't OpenSSH and sendmail both *nix based programs? Yes, the actual OS itself isnt to blame in this circumstance but don't these tools come stock with most *nix distros?

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that M$ shouldn't be held liable for the craptastic OS that it spews out all the time but really, how much worse is it security wise vanilla compaired to a vanilla install of any other os? If I remember correctly, after installing redhat 9 the other day, 2 hrs of d/ling for patchs commenced to update all the packages on it.

  5. Timothy is MY BITCH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Now, you all back off on Timothy, he's MY BITCH. Just showed him how to swallow...

  6. "Linux most attacked server" by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I find the whole thing very strange considering Slashdot itself posted the study about how Linux is the most breached OS on the net.

    But every day is I-hate-Microsoft day at Slashdot.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
  7. Re:It's About Time by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Yes, because Bush and all Republicans are a part of the Dark Conspiracy.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."