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...
GB_StormTrooper Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 Of course Linux isnt as safe as Windows....Linus is free and thus, half-ass...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt-- Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 Hold the phone: Windows 2000 Server had far fewer security vulnerabilities than Red Hat or Mandrake Linux I think everyone should know that Redhat and Mandrake are both mainly desktop linux(especially Mandrake). They are both idiot-proof to set up. Where are the statistics for Slackware(my favorite)? Or any of the BSDs? Linux is free and open source, yes. But that also means when a hacker finds a security hole, he actually patches the code(~80% of the time, another ~10% wait until the vendor has released a patch). When a new hole is discovered, how long does it take for MS to respond? How long does it take for an open source developer to respond with a fix? I subscribe to bugtraq, and let me tell you, most (linux) bugs are fixed in 1-3 days, and most times, the poster gives a quick fix until they release a permanent fix. I'd very much like to read this article, do you have a link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 I believe it. The resons MS gets all the attention is because more hackers hack MS as opposed to Linux. The reason is because most users use MS, and hackers aren't stupid people by a longshot. They know how they can affect the most people, and thats by hacking MS. Therefore, MS appears to have lots of hacking problems in its system when its is really the amount of hackers hacking it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadswitch Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 I must agree. Linux is definetely easier to screw with than windows, but there are way more people that use MS and are more familier with it. Thus it MS is hacked more. Plus linux has that bad-ass penguin on it's side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt-- Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 I'm holding off judgement until I see the actual numbers, I need a link Rave. I have great faith in my slackware. Like I said, those numbers reflect on Redhat and Mandrake, CONSUMER OSs. I want to know about the other *nixes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.