On TV.com: TOP 15: Greatest Opening TITLE SEQUENCES
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 19 of 75:
Next »
« Previous
Less vulnerable vs. Safer
Linux meets the less vulnerable test simply based on the fact that it is targeted less. Whether it is due to having a more secure architecture (which Ye rejects stating that Win2K and up are based on the same security model as Linux), or because it has a smaller usage base.

Also, while Win2K and up may be based on the same security model as Linux, implementing it is often more difficult in Windows than Linux. As I posted later on, I have dental clients that run SoftDent which requires even the clients to have full Administrative rights and won't run if you set up a user in restricted mode. Too many vendors writing for Windows just assume Admin rights where fewer programs expect or require it under Linux.

So...Linux may not be considered inherently SAFER than Win2K and up by Windows apologists, but it probably could be considered LESS VULNERABLE based on user base, security model, and fewer programs requiring full access to the system.

Just my opinion...
Posted by: TucsonGuy   Posted on: 05/21/08  (Edited: 05/21/2008 @ 07:15) You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

A better way to deal with it ...  mrlinux | 05/21/08
Which operating systems would those be?  ye | 05/21/08
Safer Operating Systems  DrBrianM | 05/21/08
For now  daMan25 | 05/21/08
I encourage you to learn  rarsa | 05/21/08
Please, please, please, puuullleeeaaasssseee!  ye | 05/21/08
Too easy...  T1Oracle | 05/21/08
Sorry but you'll have to do better:  ye | 05/21/08
Come on, Mr. Gates, a.k.a ye  Aragorn_z | 05/22/08
@Aragorn_z: I keep asking the same question because...  ye | 05/22/08
And your investigation presents what data?  flyingbuick | 05/21/08
Right...  glashoppah | 05/21/08
I think that title belonged to sendmail for quite some time.  ye | 05/21/08
He didn't say "safer". He said "less vulnerable".  ye | 05/21/08
It'd be best for you...  glashoppah | 05/21/08
That is not true  GuidingLight | 05/22/08
Ever tried OpenBSD?  davidr69 | 05/21/08
Sure have. My original question stands.  ye | 05/21/08
Less vulnerable vs. Safer  TucsonGuy | 05/21/08
Vulnerabilities exist whether anyone targets the platform...  ye | 05/21/08
Types of Security Problems  slaskoske | 05/22/08
Does it really matter WHY...  arminw | 05/21/08
Yes, if you actually expect a problem to be fixed.  ye | 05/22/08
There are no safer operating systems  Lerianis | 05/22/08
Gimme a BREAK!  howard.blake@... | 05/21/08
So true...  glashoppah | 05/21/08
you called?  GiMMeABreak | 05/23/08
REALLY?  NHMtnMan | 05/21/08
Wow. the first post is nothing but a Troll!  GuidingLight | 05/22/08
Very impartial response...  GetReal-mac.com | 05/23/08
BUYING antivirus is a waste of time  kcredden2 | 05/21/08
Not worthless, but shouldn't be bloated  Norcross | 05/21/08
Totally agree  cmosentine | 05/21/08
Medical Practice problems  TucsonGuy | 05/21/08
Yes SoftDent is a security nightmare!  frankinks | 05/21/08
Sounds like they need different software. NT  ThereThere | 05/22/08
Dental Software...  randysmith@... | 05/22/08
RE: Antivirus is 'completely wasted money': Cisco CSO  rmlounsbury@... | 05/21/08
Antivirus Wasted Money!  brotherjim01@... | 05/21/08
If I was an IT...  Drakaran | 05/21/08
Give them a day off...  ThereThere | 05/22/08
Using virtual machines is the only practical solution  progon | 05/21/08
I wouldn't count on that  Drakaran | 05/21/08
I would say, "Windows is wasted money". Switch to Linux!  xunil skcor | 05/21/08
Why?  ceward_z | 05/21/08
if IBM sells it, on a mainframe, it's clearly not that buggy.  shryko | 05/21/08
Are you so sure?  slaskoske | 05/22/08
Good question  davidr69 | 05/21/08
Let's not single out 1 pot  flyingbuick | 05/21/08
Well, I think the "no brainer" part  GuidingLight | 05/22/08
What happens when Linux is 80% market?  randysmith@... | 05/22/08
How about SELinux?  davidr69 | 05/21/08
Likely not an option for the "average" user.  ye | 05/21/08
RE: Antivirus is 'completely wasted money': Cisco CSO  Timpraetor | 05/21/08
RE: Antivirus vs. Whitelist  david.swift@... | 05/21/08
RE: Antivirus is 'completely wasted money': Cisco CSO  kbulenda@... | 05/21/08
not even white hat or black hat, Just OLD HAT  topsecret@... | 05/21/08
Great Windows Security Solution...  Gabriel Kent | 05/21/08
AV not needed?  pwood57@... | 05/21/08
No AV software is 100%  Drakaran | 05/26/08
Norton is the worst of the useless anti NOTHING software.  okc_rn@... | 05/21/08
Vundo....  sframberger@... | 05/22/08
If it's such an ugly infection  Lerianis | 05/22/08
Antivirus is maybe a wasted money'  troubled241 | 05/22/08
Use POSIX OS, Port blocking a good Magic Box a VM and forget about it  pla777@... | 05/22/08
RE: Antivirus is 'completely wasted money': Cisco CSO  ThereThere | 05/22/08
RE: Antivirus is 'completely wasted money': Cisco CSO  dingers412@... | 05/22/08
There's a huge flaw in this argument  D. W. Bierbaum | 05/22/08
I'll be blunt  Lerianis | 05/22/08
Are white-lists really the answer?  Hameiri | 05/22/08
RE: Antivirus is 'completely wasted money': Cisco CSO  dcolbert@... | 05/22/08
RE: Antivirus is 'completely wasted money': Cisco CSO  baylors | 05/22/08
We run a proxy server...  bjbrock | 05/22/08
Much better to sue ....  milton@... | 05/23/08
RE: Antivirus is 'completely wasted money': Cisco CSO  sediza@... | 09/06/09

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement