CaptainRAVE Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 Despite the widely-held belief that the open-source operating system Linux is hands-down more secure than Microsoft, statistics gathered by leading security company SecurityFocus on their NTBugTraq site say differently. According to the most recent statistics, available up to August 2001, Windows 2000 Server had far fewer security vulnerabilities than Red Hat or Mandrake Linux - less than half as many, in fact. Sun's Solaris OS was tied with Win2000. This information is not a fluke. Looking back over the last five years, Microsoft NT and Win2000 servers had fewer security violations than Linux, despite being used more widely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilleApplePie Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 That's only base installed (as far as linux goes) if you know what you're doing you can seal it way better than windows. It's like installing windows without using any patches or anything like that. Linux has ports open by default so unless it's closed, of course there's going to be security problems. I wouldn't put too much into what that says. If you know linux, then linux will always be better. No offense but...windows is for idiots. I don't mean that in a bad way, because right now I'm still using windows, when I get a new computer, I'll be running linux. *grins* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt-- Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31775 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.