Unix is not as secure as some people think. In fact recently a Linux server that I have some dealings with had a nasty virus on it. Someone found a hole, and exploited it. Just because it isn't broadcast all over the TV like M$ exploits, does not mean it's not there.
Security is something we all need to keep an eye on. With today's wide open world, we will see more and more issues. Take steps to keep your machines clean, your data safe. It takes a little money, and some good maintenance, and caution. Reading up on things is always a good idea and keep yourself safe.
Security is something we all need to keep an eye on. With today's wide open world, we will see more and more issues. Take steps to keep your machines clean, your data safe. It takes a little money, and some good maintenance, and caution. Reading up on things is always a good idea and keep yourself safe.
Caveat emptor (buyer beware) was a Roman saying. When in Rome, don't do anything like the Romans! (a wife's warning to a husband departing on a business trip to Rome after watching Fellini's "La dolce vita").
Tullio
I don't think we can blame windoze users when they get caught as windoze is an open invitation to get caught out. M$ has worked very hard to make windoze "user friendly" and in doing so has opened so many security holes it hurts. Many windoze users are so used to having their hand held its like they are children and children need protecting.
There are reallybasic things MS could have done years ago to stop many exploits and other nasties. My favourite is leaving all the ports open! Why on Earth would anyone do that?!?! Why would port 0 be opened at all?
Around the time Win XP came out, I did a short paper on Windows and about half way through it I cam to the conclusion that I could not, in good conscious, professionally recommend Windows for use in a commercial environment and added those words in my conclusion.
Unix is not as secure as some people think. In fact recently a Linux server that I have some dealings with had a nasty virus on it. Someone found a hole, and exploited it. Just because it isn't broadcast all over the TV like M$ exploits, does not mean it's not there.
If that truly was a Virus, then you found the first Linux Virus in the wild... Worldwide.
As far as I know, no Linux Virus ever spread outside of laboratories, in which they were specificially designed as 'proof of concept' (failing to infect, however, without massive User errors and making deliberately false settings to open the required gates)
The only security issue for Linux are Exploits, requiring manual and per-case Hacks of isolated machines and running buggy Software Versions. That alone, however, is to be taken serious, be it for Linux servers or any other Linux Systems with fixed IP.
Comparing it to the Win32 situation on the other side, there simply are no automated and pre-programmed Worms, Viruses or Trojans existing. That's why even an open/buggy Linux System can be online for a year without catching anything bad, whereas a stock Win32 (Win2000/XP) box would stand no chance (unless the User is lucky as hell).
Windows is basically insecure because it is designed that way.
The constant requirement for Patching is keeping the majority of 0815-Installations frequently in touch with the MicroSoft Network - permanently collecting and evaluating information taken off the volunerable machines.
Frequent Patches also allow for flexible responses to include own malware (by European privacy standards literally plain espionage), elude 3rd Party Anti-Malware Software and couple unwanted features to bring them onboard.
Having just about every single Program equipped with Networking ability by now, the OS itself has become the most effective backdoor for MicroSoft.
Some argue that MicroSoft has inofficially already become America's latest Intelligence Agency... currently still controlling the largest, unique identifyable/targetable amount of Computers. A logical move in a sense.
Since approx. 2 years, Bill Gates and Key Personnel have repeatedly had coordination meetings with various US Security Agencies in the White house.
Linus Torvalds and the Open Source Community on the contrary hav not been invited so far, making Linux heaps and bounds more secure than Win32 will be in the forseeable future. Security and Windows just don't go together very well.
I have only one 24/7 working Windows machine remaining, and basically everything networkable MicroSoft on it has been either replaced by OpenSource Utilities and/or is permanently blocked from accessing any Network for good reasons.
When I get tired of it, it will be Linux all the way, because I prefer an honest OS and effective Privacy / Security of own Data over a colorific, bloated security risk (a la Vista) any day.
Some argue that MicroSoft has inofficially already become America's latest Intelligence Agency... currently still controlling the largest, unique identifyable/targetable amount of Computers. A logical move in a sense.
Since approx. 2 years, Bill Gates and Key Personnel have repeatedly had coordination meetings with various US Security Agencies in the White house.
Linus Torvalds and the Open Source Community on the contrary hav not been invited so far, making Linux heaps and bounds more secure than Win32 will be in the forseeable future. Security and Windows just don't go together very well.
When I read this, I get an image of you standing in a darkly lit room with Dean Haglund (Langly), Bruce Harwood (Byers), and Tom Braidwood (Frohike), aka The Lone Gunmen
While Linux may be a wonderful OS for me some day, and millions of others another day, one of the biggest detriments to your own cause is the perception (reality?) that Linux advocates (borderline-Zealots?) from time to time make seemingly irrational, paranoid, and bombastic statements not terribly unlike the one you just made above... Even if what you say/imply is true, the problem is that these statements, as well as the attitude from Clownius below where he calls Windows "windoze", makes me feel that there is a fringe element in the Linux camp that is very "fanboi"-like... Yes, that attitude I'm sure also exists in the Microsoft camp as well...
Im a fanboy and openly admit it lol. I was once a windoze fanboy too but my arguments kept getting shot down and my eyes opened to the world of Linux. Windoze is a fine OS just not really online and as i said its this user friendliness thats to blame. Everything is easy for anyone, including virus writers.
My concern is that 90% of windoze users are so used to user friendliness that they really have little or no idea what they are doing and can not be blamed as some on this thread have blamed them for someone exploiting them and their weaknesses. I also suggest Wate could use his time much more productively by working on Open Source software. They have it for windoze too.
For the life of me I don't know why people seem to think that things being "easy" is automatically "A Bad Thing". Perhaps in 10-20 more years as more of the populace becomes technologically savvy, the need for something extremely simple will diminish, but for now, I completely dare you to sit a 70+ year old person in front of a Linux distro and have them configure it on their own. Unless their careers were in the Sciences or in the military, it is doubtful that it's going to happen. There are still a great many people out there that grew up during WW2. Those people are now grandparents and can feel more involved with being able to share pictures of their grandkids that live hundreds or thousands of miles away... Yes, you can do that with Linux too, but I doubt people of that generation will have the patience for something that has to be configured like Linux. People like to be able to install and go.
Until either Linux overcomes this image of being "not for n00bs" or the technological savviness of the population grows, Linux, no matter how good it may be, will remain largely in the domain of geeks/uber-geeks...
Most recent Linux distros recognize the hardware you are installing them on and configure themselves automatically. Mine (SuSE) also sees my Windows partition and leaves it alone. I can boot from either, at will. And Open Office is no more difficult than Windows Office. Only when you connect some recent piece of hardware. say a digital camera, a printer, etc., you might noi find the driver which is supplied most of the times for Windows only by the hardware maker. But sending pictures of my grandkids is not difficult, because from Linux I can access also the Windows partition. I am 71 but I admit a previous UNIX experience. But most of the times UNIX was a line of command environment, with no GUI. Then X11 came along. Today I use KDE, which is very Windows like.
Tullio
I'd describe Windows as 'permissive' meaning that it generally bends over backwards to attempt to satisfy some request. This is probably a deliberate design point to make MS products inter-operable and thus widespread. Thus lies it's weaknesses to be exploited ....
Other systems are more restrictive by comparison, thus if no prior arrangements ( security wise ) are made then it simply doesn't happen. However that is significantly less co-operative for casual interactions ....
.... so in the end the computer is as safe as the room you lock it in. :-)
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Unix is not as secure as some
)
Unix is not as secure as some people think. In fact recently a Linux server that I have some dealings with had a nasty virus on it. Someone found a hole, and exploited it. Just because it isn't broadcast all over the TV like M$ exploits, does not mean it's not there.
Security is something we all need to keep an eye on. With today's wide open world, we will see more and more issues. Take steps to keep your machines clean, your data safe. It takes a little money, and some good maintenance, and caution. Reading up on things is always a good idea and keep yourself safe.
RE: Security is something
)
Caveat emptor (buyer beware) was a Roman saying. When in Rome, don't do anything like the Romans! (a wife's warning to a husband departing on a business trip to Rome after watching Fellini's "La dolce vita").
Tullio
RE: I don't think we can
)
There are reallybasic things MS could have done years ago to stop many exploits and other nasties. My favourite is leaving all the ports open! Why on Earth would anyone do that?!?! Why would port 0 be opened at all?
Around the time Win XP came out, I did a short paper on Windows and about half way through it I cam to the conclusion that I could not, in good conscious, professionally recommend Windows for use in a commercial environment and added those words in my conclusion.
Join the #1 Aussie Alliance on Einstein
RE: Unix is not as secure
)
If that truly was a Virus, then you found the first Linux Virus in the wild... Worldwide.
As far as I know, no Linux Virus ever spread outside of laboratories, in which they were specificially designed as 'proof of concept' (failing to infect, however, without massive User errors and making deliberately false settings to open the required gates)
The only security issue for Linux are Exploits, requiring manual and per-case Hacks of isolated machines and running buggy Software Versions. That alone, however, is to be taken serious, be it for Linux servers or any other Linux Systems with fixed IP.
Comparing it to the Win32 situation on the other side, there simply are no automated and pre-programmed Worms, Viruses or Trojans existing. That's why even an open/buggy Linux System can be online for a year without catching anything bad, whereas a stock Win32 (Win2000/XP) box would stand no chance (unless the User is lucky as hell).
Windows is basically insecure because it is designed that way.
The constant requirement for Patching is keeping the majority of 0815-Installations frequently in touch with the MicroSoft Network - permanently collecting and evaluating information taken off the volunerable machines.
Frequent Patches also allow for flexible responses to include own malware (by European privacy standards literally plain espionage), elude 3rd Party Anti-Malware Software and couple unwanted features to bring them onboard.
Having just about every single Program equipped with Networking ability by now, the OS itself has become the most effective backdoor for MicroSoft.
Some argue that MicroSoft has inofficially already become America's latest Intelligence Agency... currently still controlling the largest, unique identifyable/targetable amount of Computers. A logical move in a sense.
Since approx. 2 years, Bill Gates and Key Personnel have repeatedly had coordination meetings with various US Security Agencies in the White house.
Linus Torvalds and the Open Source Community on the contrary hav not been invited so far, making Linux heaps and bounds more secure than Win32 will be in the forseeable future. Security and Windows just don't go together very well.
I have only one 24/7 working Windows machine remaining, and basically everything networkable MicroSoft on it has been either replaced by OpenSource Utilities and/or is permanently blocked from accessing any Network for good reasons.
When I get tired of it, it will be Linux all the way, because I prefer an honest OS and effective Privacy / Security of own Data over a colorific, bloated security risk (a la Vista) any day.
I beg to differ:List of Linux
)
I beg to differ:
List of Linux viruses.
RE: Some argue that
)
When I read this, I get an image of you standing in a darkly lit room with Dean Haglund (Langly), Bruce Harwood (Byers), and Tom Braidwood (Frohike), aka The Lone Gunmen
While Linux may be a wonderful OS for me some day, and millions of others another day, one of the biggest detriments to your own cause is the perception (reality?) that Linux advocates (borderline-Zealots?) from time to time make seemingly irrational, paranoid, and bombastic statements not terribly unlike the one you just made above... Even if what you say/imply is true, the problem is that these statements, as well as the attitude from Clownius below where he calls Windows "windoze", makes me feel that there is a fringe element in the Linux camp that is very "fanboi"-like... Yes, that attitude I'm sure also exists in the Microsoft camp as well...
Brian - platform agnostic
Im a fanboy and openly admit
)
Im a fanboy and openly admit it lol. I was once a windoze fanboy too but my arguments kept getting shot down and my eyes opened to the world of Linux. Windoze is a fine OS just not really online and as i said its this user friendliness thats to blame. Everything is easy for anyone, including virus writers.
My concern is that 90% of windoze users are so used to user friendliness that they really have little or no idea what they are doing and can not be blamed as some on this thread have blamed them for someone exploiting them and their weaknesses. I also suggest Wate could use his time much more productively by working on Open Source software. They have it for windoze too.
RE: Everything is easy for
)
For the life of me I don't know why people seem to think that things being "easy" is automatically "A Bad Thing". Perhaps in 10-20 more years as more of the populace becomes technologically savvy, the need for something extremely simple will diminish, but for now, I completely dare you to sit a 70+ year old person in front of a Linux distro and have them configure it on their own. Unless their careers were in the Sciences or in the military, it is doubtful that it's going to happen. There are still a great many people out there that grew up during WW2. Those people are now grandparents and can feel more involved with being able to share pictures of their grandkids that live hundreds or thousands of miles away... Yes, you can do that with Linux too, but I doubt people of that generation will have the patience for something that has to be configured like Linux. People like to be able to install and go.
Until either Linux overcomes this image of being "not for n00bs" or the technological savviness of the population grows, Linux, no matter how good it may be, will remain largely in the domain of geeks/uber-geeks...
Brian
Most recent Linux distros
)
Most recent Linux distros recognize the hardware you are installing them on and configure themselves automatically. Mine (SuSE) also sees my Windows partition and leaves it alone. I can boot from either, at will. And Open Office is no more difficult than Windows Office. Only when you connect some recent piece of hardware. say a digital camera, a printer, etc., you might noi find the driver which is supplied most of the times for Windows only by the hardware maker. But sending pictures of my grandkids is not difficult, because from Linux I can access also the Windows partition. I am 71 but I admit a previous UNIX experience. But most of the times UNIX was a line of command environment, with no GUI. Then X11 came along. Today I use KDE, which is very Windows like.
Tullio
I'd describe Windows as
)
I'd describe Windows as 'permissive' meaning that it generally bends over backwards to attempt to satisfy some request. This is probably a deliberate design point to make MS products inter-operable and thus widespread. Thus lies it's weaknesses to be exploited ....
Other systems are more restrictive by comparison, thus if no prior arrangements ( security wise ) are made then it simply doesn't happen. However that is significantly less co-operative for casual interactions ....
.... so in the end the computer is as safe as the room you lock it in. :-)
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal