Linux and Windows Security Neck and Neck

Linurati writes "According to vnunet.com, Linux and Windows are neck and neck when it comes to security, but 'misleading figures and surveys are muddying the waters.' The article lays blame on both sides for the misleading information." From the article: "...Microsoft had made real progress on security in the past two years, but that the increasing number of Linux enthusiasts coming into the market would help the open source alternative in the long run."

Comments

Re:More users != more secure

[de Bois-Guilbert]

I didn't forget about it as much as don't believe in or care about it. :)

so they're omitting the IE ones?

[YesIAmAScript]

I don't think so.

IE and IIS patches are usually counted in the Windows lists.

As to Office, sharepoint, Office (nice one), Project, all MS games and SQL server, I have NONE of those things on my machine, same as many others. They do cost money, and many people don't have them. So why should they be counted as Windows problems?

Counting the bugs in bundled games like Minesweeper and Hearts is fair game. But counting Age of Empires doesn't make any sense.

We can rank the vulnurabilities in non-bundled games separately. I'll get started on the 50,000 Windows games, while you do Tux Racer and Quake 3. Okay?

Re:A friend of mine...

[Master of Transhuman]

Percentage of Linux users with a clue: 98%

Percentage of Windows users with a clue: 0%

Percentage of /. Windows trolls with a clue: Duh!

Percentage of /. Windows trolls who are actually proud that they use "stupid logic": 100%

Now go stuff your own dick up your ass, Windows troll.

Re:Maybe for servers...

[jthughey]

(Granted, most people who use Linux at home are knowledgeable enough to keep even a Windows machine safe.)

Uh, no. If you've spent your entire learning curve on a linux machine you're not going to know the first thing about securing a Windows box. Yes, a lot of the same principles will be used in the securing, but that doesn't change the fundamental differences in the operating systems. I realize that you said "most people" and that you may know what you are doing with a Windows machine. I know a number of linux people however who run/ran Windows machines and have had them hacked. More evidence against Windows? Nope. They didn't take the time to download updates as well as set the necessary security policies to prevent outside access.

Just because the average user running Linux is more paranoid about security than a Windows user doesn't mean that Linux is inherently a more secure operating system.

Check out this link and read "Eric's Opinion".
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2003Jun/gee20030 605020295.htm

--
"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain

If Windows is neck and neck with Linux

[WillAffleckUW]

on security, why is it that the Space Shuttle was disabled due to a Windows failure?

Now if they'd just used Linux or some other Open Source product like BSD, we'd have the Space Shuttle back up there fixing the Hubble, but now they have to deploy the Military Space Shuttle and install those frickin lasers ...