Please include all the security holes in Vista that were not made public so we can actually compare these meaningless numbers.
I've worked in places that had _SERIOUS_ problems with windows, and I mean global cascade crashes of thosands of servers at costs running info many millions a day and my company covered everything up for the sake of their share price. Microsoft sneaked out a fix ( months later BTW ) globally on the back of some other fix without the real extent of of the problem being visible to anyone except my company and Microsoft. It's quite impossible to cover anything up with Linux, everything is public.
Therefore - Your numbers are bull, they don't include cover-up fixes.
Linux is still used predominantly by clued users and/or administrators who (usually) know what they're doing. The amount of clueless computer users who also have the root password is fairly low. And the average user with a clue doesn't click everything sent to him, the average admin cannot because he can't check his mail on the server (at least if security did their job).
And hence the market for malware is rather tiny.
Linux is used by all sorts of people including a lot of people with no clue who got sick of Windows. Where I work there is a woman who thinks she uses Windows, She actually uses CentOS 5.4 running GNOME and she doesn't know or care about the difference.
You only need to telnet to a POP3 or IMAP server to check your mail. Most users won't do that though.
Actually, when it comes to out-of-the-box security as well as the possibilities offered to knowledgeable admins, Linux isn't really far away from Windows.
In theory they both have good security models but Windows has had to compromise everything for the sake of backward compatibility. Windows also has a very long history of bad implementation work leading to security holes.
In practise Windows is a nightmare to secure and a nightmare to use in any serious environment due to bugs everywhere are very poor documentation. Linux is a hell of a lot better on all counts but also not perfect.
Which versions of Linux? Are you saying on binary can attack all of them? No. You are not. Windows has decades of backwards compatibility to deal with. Don't try and compare phones with desktops. Callin bs on that bs out of the gate.
Phones have enough processor power and bandwidth these days to make them a target worth attacking. You can also steal a lot of user information from phones.
How many of those devices are WORTH hacking, let alone what is the target profile?
Every single one, if for no other reason than they would make good jumping off points to hack other systems.
The reason Linux gets hacked less than windows isn't because there is less Linux, it's because Windows in insecure by design. All the security 'features' that have ever been added to Windows are just band-aids over that insecure design.
The Morris worm worked because it was new, no-one was expecting it or even considered the existance of anything like it. Now it's obvious but back then it was about as expected as an alien invasion.
Unix closed the obvious security holes very easily but Windows never could close its security holes because you can't retrospectively change bad design decisions without breaking most of your backward compatibility.
More like Linux still doesn't have the market share to warrent spending significant time developing malware for it.
That's a false argument. There are enough Linux machines on the internet to justify spending time writing malware for.
Linux and UNIX in general was designed from the start to be secure. Windows is designed to be backward compatible and have a nice user interface. It's simply impossible to add security to Windows at this point without breaking backward compatibity and all kinds of third party software.
Uh, sorry, but as a person who has managed to avoid infection for a very long time now, usually the only way a system gets infected with malware is through user stupidity.
I've met plenty of smart people who work with computers day to day who use windows and claim to have never suffered from malware of any kind. Plenty had their home IPs on spammer blacklists and didn't know it.
What you actually mean is _as far as you know_ you have managed to avoid infection.
After decades abusing customers maybe apple also google have come to the conclusion that they can do anything and people will put up with it.
see, it applies to any large co that continues down the path of 'owning you'.
I'm not saying Apple or Google behave in any perfect way, only that Microsoft have got used to abusing their customer base with bug ridden, insecure, and poorly designed rubbish.
I don't buy overpriced and locked down Apple kit either.
That's a big overreaction. The OpenBSD base system comes with lots of nice stuff, it does mail, web, NTP, and DNS for example plus all sorts of cool networking and firewalling tools. FreeBSD has native ZFS so don't tell me that BSD's lack cool toys.
The problems you describe are not due to the operating systems involved, but the people and policies. There is no reason why you can't run an anonymous FTP server on *BSD.
You don't know much about VUPEN -- they are expletive deleted low-lifes of the first order. VUPEN used their existing 0-day exploits from older versions of Windows -- and they don't tell the manufacturers about the exploits -- they only sell them for big bucks to government intell. agencies, etc.
If low-lives can find these zero days how come MS with their massive profits and massive install base can't find them first and fix them?
Maybe because fixing Windows is like polishing a turd.
What I've seen is not your everyday phenomenon, explainable by swamp gases or delusions.
Do tell, I for one really want to know what phenomenon you are talking about. Just let me know what your senses picked up and I'll draw my own conclusions.
The world looks to America to set a good example, and America leads by example.
No it doesn't. The rest of the world looks to the US, but not because America is some great moral leader.
The US doesn't 'lead by example'. The rest of the world isn't following. The reason they are not following is because the US is not a very good example.
According to the Republicans involved, it was an accident. Is the same thing going on across the country all accidents? When does that excuse become non-credible.
Does it really matter if both existing parties are essentially the same thing and obeying the hand(s) that feel them?
Yes, because it's more distraction from the fact that the two party system is in fact a one set of interests system.
Voters get confused by the distractions, the broken promises, and the layers of hate these sides pile on each other. People don't see that the complexity of the world can't be reduced down to two parties.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows Vista: Until now 377 vulnerabilities has been discovered.
Linux kernel 2.6: Until now 633 vulnerabilities has been discovered.
Please include all the security holes in Vista that were not made public so we can actually compare these meaningless numbers.
I've worked in places that had _SERIOUS_ problems with windows, and I mean global cascade crashes of thosands of servers at costs running info many millions a day and my company covered everything up for the sake of their share price. Microsoft sneaked out a fix ( months later BTW ) globally on the back of some other fix without the real extent of of the problem being visible to anyone except my company and Microsoft. It's quite impossible to cover anything up with Linux, everything is public.
Therefore - Your numbers are bull, they don't include cover-up fixes.
Linux is still used predominantly by clued users and/or administrators who (usually) know what they're doing. The amount of clueless computer users who also have the root password is fairly low. And the average user with a clue doesn't click everything sent to him, the average admin cannot because he can't check his mail on the server (at least if security did their job).
And hence the market for malware is rather tiny.
Linux is used by all sorts of people including a lot of people with no clue who got sick of Windows. Where I work there is a woman who thinks she uses Windows, She actually uses CentOS 5.4 running GNOME and she doesn't know or care about the difference.
You only need to telnet to a POP3 or IMAP server to check your mail. Most users won't do that though.
..even if you run as an administrator (equivalent to root)..
Administrator is not equivalent to root. Windows and Linux are designed quite differently, it's just wrong to say these two things are equivalent.
Now go on and tell us about the latest band-aids Microsoft has pasted over the open wounds of Windows security.
Actually, when it comes to out-of-the-box security as well as the possibilities offered to knowledgeable admins, Linux isn't really far away from Windows.
In theory they both have good security models but Windows has had to compromise everything for the sake of backward compatibility. Windows also has a very long history of bad implementation work leading to security holes.
In practise Windows is a nightmare to secure and a nightmare to use in any serious environment due to bugs everywhere are very poor documentation. Linux is a hell of a lot better on all counts but also not perfect.
Why the fuck is this discredited old FUD still being voted up?
Because a lot of moderators either know nothing about IT or are being paid to spread MS's FUD.
How about figuring out how many Linux machines are in the world and the number of infections on them than doing the same with Windows?
Which versions of Linux? Are you saying on binary can attack all of them? No. You are not. Windows has decades of backwards compatibility to deal with. Don't try and compare phones with desktops. Callin bs on that bs out of the gate.
Phones have enough processor power and bandwidth these days to make them a target worth attacking. You can also steal a lot of user information from phones.
I'm calling BS on you BS_Mung_42.
How many of those devices are WORTH hacking, let alone what is the target profile?
Every single one, if for no other reason than they would make good jumping off points to hack other systems.
The reason Linux gets hacked less than windows isn't because there is less Linux, it's because Windows in insecure by design. All the security 'features' that have ever been added to Windows are just band-aids over that insecure design.
That's just daft. All Linux has the kernel in common or it's not Linux to begin with.
You don't actually appear to know what Linux is..
The Morris worm worked because it was new, no-one was expecting it or even considered the existance of anything like it. Now it's obvious but back then it was about as expected as an alien invasion.
Unix closed the obvious security holes very easily but Windows never could close its security holes because you can't retrospectively change bad design decisions without breaking most of your backward compatibility.
More like Linux still doesn't have the market share to warrent spending significant time developing malware for it.
That's a false argument. There are enough Linux machines on the internet to justify spending time writing malware for.
Linux and UNIX in general was designed from the start to be secure. Windows is designed to be backward compatible and have a nice user interface. It's simply impossible to add security to Windows at this point without breaking backward compatibity and all kinds of third party software.
Uh, sorry, but as a person who has managed to avoid infection for a very long time now, usually the only way a system gets infected with malware is through user stupidity.
I've met plenty of smart people who work with computers day to day who use windows and claim to have never suffered from malware of any kind. Plenty had their home IPs on spammer blacklists and didn't know it.
What you actually mean is _as far as you know_ you have managed to avoid infection.
him finally coming out how he started WO2 and the Spanish inquisition? By the way they have treated him I am sure he is ready to confess those too.
I didn't expect some kind of Spanish inquisition.
What's in it for the rest of the world if Obama wins?
Less new wars.
After decades abusing customers maybe apple also google have come to the conclusion that they can do anything and people will put up with it.
see, it applies to any large co that continues down the path of 'owning you'.
I'm not saying Apple or Google behave in any perfect way, only that Microsoft have got used to abusing their customer base with bug ridden, insecure, and poorly designed rubbish.
I don't buy overpriced and locked down Apple kit either.
These people that are coming up with shit like this are insane.
It's true, yet they keep coming up with shit like this.
After decades abusing customers maybe Microsoft have come to the conclusion that they can do anything and people will put up with it.
That's a big overreaction. The OpenBSD base system comes with lots of nice stuff, it does mail, web, NTP, and DNS for example plus all sorts of cool networking and firewalling tools. FreeBSD has native ZFS so don't tell me that BSD's lack cool toys.
The problems you describe are not due to the operating systems involved, but the people and policies. There is no reason why you can't run an anonymous FTP server on *BSD.
You don't know much about VUPEN -- they are expletive deleted low-lifes of the first order. VUPEN used their existing 0-day exploits from older versions of Windows -- and they don't tell the manufacturers about the exploits -- they only sell them for big bucks to government intell. agencies, etc.
If low-lives can find these zero days how come MS with their massive profits and massive install base can't find them first and fix them?
Maybe because fixing Windows is like polishing a turd.
Security holes! In Windows!
It's just like every other release from Microsoft then, bug ridden and insecure.
Sell them, they are worth money.
Or does your company not use money?
What I've seen is not your everyday phenomenon, explainable by swamp gases or delusions.
Do tell, I for one really want to know what phenomenon you are talking about. Just let me know what your senses picked up and I'll draw my own conclusions.
And fear and surprise. And ruthless efficiency.
The US has never lead by moral exemplitude, they lead by the force of arms.
And by reckless spending on borrowed money.
The world looks to America to set a good example, and America leads by example.
No it doesn't. The rest of the world looks to the US, but not because America is some great moral leader.
The US doesn't 'lead by example'. The rest of the world isn't following. The reason they are not following is because the US is not a very good example.
Does it really matter if both existing parties are essentially the same thing and obeying the hand(s) that feel them?
Yes, because it's more distraction from the fact that the two party system is in fact a one set of interests system.
Voters get confused by the distractions, the broken promises, and the layers of hate these sides pile on each other. People don't see that the complexity of the world can't be reduced down to two parties.