[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [OT] New Anti-Terrorism Law makes "hacking" punishable by life in prison
    In message <>, "M. Edward Borasky
    " wrote:
    >2. The Linux community should *not* believe that we are less vulnerable than
    >Microsoft! We are less vulnerable *now* only because Linux is not as

    I need not believe - I just see it now.

    >widespread as Windows. Were Linux, say, half of the market, the
    >vulnerability would be equal. The difference is strictly the number of

    Plain simply wrong - Linux has more than 50% in the "Internet
    server market" (even if some company's propaganda department's do not
    admit this).
    Attacker choose the weakest target (this is usually also the largest,
    but not necessarily).

    >available hosts for these parasitic codes, not anything inherent in the
    >details of Windows or Linux, or in the organizational mechanisms (corporate
    >giant vs. "brutal meritocracy", closed source vs. open source, etc.).

    It is "the details" that matter in this area.
    M$ sells their software with the "everyone can install it, use, etc.
    because it is user-friendly[0], it does exactly what the user needs,
    it does everything automatically, etc." argument (which is plain simply
    Therefore lots of people install and run servers on the web without really
    knowing what they are doing. Apparently they think that they install
    it and it runs on its own (which is wrong).
    The learning curve on a U*ix system with some appropriate server
    software on it s much steeper. So if you get such a system on the web
    you are forced to know more about it (and usually at one point
    you get to people who basically force you to think about security or
    other areas).

    You could run a "secure" Win*server or workstations on the Net, but his means
    -) you install all relevant patches immediately (not ASAP - immediately).
    -) you disable all kinds of automatic code execution features (which
    means disabling all the nifty features, setting all hosts to
    "internet zone", disable Active-X and JavaScript[2] completely, etc.).
    If you would do this, you could as well run the service on a U*ix
    system because the functional features are the same and you get
    patches much earlier (how long took the tear-drop patch for WinNT ?).

    >In fact, I suspect that the open source for Linux gives creators of vicious
    >attack codes a *slight* advantage, since the vulnerabilities are there for

    You should also list the disadvantages, not only one argument if you
    you want to be serious.

    >anyone to read and exploit before they are found by an alert Linux
    >community. And if Linux is to succeed in the enterprise, we in the community
    >owe it to ourselves to *enhance* that alertness -- indeed, to be more
    >vigilant on security issues -- even if it's at the expense of some of our
    >more favorite activities, like performance tweaking.

    Read the usenet and you will see a significant difference.
    Until then you are trolling.

    [ TOFU-Mail deleted ]


    [0] : Does anyone know why there are that much Win*-Books on the
    shelves if the software is so easy to use ?
    [1] : If a server is badly administered the sysadmin of that server is
    also partly guilty (even if he didn't have a clue) - you should
    also blame them.
    [2] : This should actually be disabled on all browsers on the world.
    Actually this should be removed completely.
    Bernd Petrovitsch Email :
    g.a.m.s gmbh Fax : +43 1 205255-900
    Prinz-Eugen-Straße 8 A-1040 Vienna/Austria/Europe
    LUGA :

    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [W:0.027 / U:17.148 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site