Windows is insecure

[pwaring]

What can I say? Windows is insecure and no-one in their right mind would use it for anything that required stability, security or reliability (i.e. everything but desktop publishing/word processing).

Switch to *nix ASAP, if you can't bear to be without Windows in case you need it (WHY?) then install a second hard drive.

[Quad]

LOL...We have a genius in the house.

[AlexPBaston]

Wow... thanks for the info. I never would have guessed...

Don't mean to be too harsh on ya, but I thought that everyone knew that Windoze sucks. Anyways, maybe it helped out some newbies... so new that they were in isolation and just figured out how to press the little button that looks sorta like (') with the flashing light next to it. Well, I guess people need to be told about this some way or another.

God bless you all :)

[pwaring]

What little button? ;)

The main reason for the post was to get someone, anyone, to change from Windows to *nix. If just one person switches OS because of this then it'll have been worth the while.

[xraystan]

Am I the only one who is getting a bit tired with all of this Windows bashing?:sleep:
As long as you test it and configure it correctly a WindowsNT or now Windows 2000 server can be a secure as any *nix box.

A badly configured *nix box will be just a vunerable to attack as any Windows box.:george:

[Neophyte]

I use *nix exclusively for work that needs to be secure. I would never use Windows for anything other than running a personal computer at home so I can play games. This is my personal preference. But if someone says that an operating system is more secure than another then they are sadly mistaken. Any valid OS, *nix, Doze, etc... are only as secure as the sysadmin make them. Thus, the most secure system has the smartest people working on it. That is why it is harder to break into Microsoft than it is to break into a military base run by 18 year old high school drop outs.

[FlashOveride]

Ok I can understand that a person likes windows because it is the main operating software for GUI software. I admit I like windows for playing games and for work. Being a web designer I have to use a lot of software out there that is only available in windows. I love to play PC games in which windows is the place for that.

HOWEVER.....to say that windows is even close to being a secure system is nuts. I will admit that Unix is only as good as the person securing it but because of it being open source you know where the security weaknesses are. In windows you only know if microsoft tells you. I admit that my knowledge in security is only at a newbie level. I however have used linux and windows and if the software that I use could be run in Linux I would have no need for windows. I also know that running a webserver on a linux box is so much easier than any windows box.

Humm lets see Code Red ring a bell?? Did that worm hurt any linux boxes?? Then again who am I to bash windows when I use it day in and day out. It is sad because myself like so many cannot stand windows but continue to support it by using it. We get on here and talk about what crap it is but we are using it to post on here. I will admit that I am really trying to learn more about linux and work towards using it rather than windows. Now that I have started using the Opera browser which works on Linux and superseeds Netscape and IE I am slowly getting away from software that require the windows umbilical chord.

Cheers!!:bigpimp:

[Quad]

Originally posted by FlashOveride
Ok I can understand that a person likes windows because it is the main operating software for GUI software. I admit I like windows for playing games and for work. Being a web designer I have to use a lot of software out there that is only available in windows. I love to play PC games in which windows is the place for that.

HOWEVER.....to say that windows is even close to being a secure system is nuts. I will admit that Unix is only as good as the person securing it but because of it being open source you know where the security weaknesses are. In windows you only know if microsoft tells you. I admit that my knowledge in security is only at a newbie level. I however have used linux and windows and if the software that I use could be run in Linux I would have no need for windows. I also know that running a webserver on a linux box is so much easier than any windows box.


You would sound so much more intelligent if you got your facts straight *before* posting.


Factoid # 1: Yes windows is the most exploited OS running. This is due to the fact that windows is running more than 85% of the worlds computers. This could be sumed up with the following example.

Example: If 85% of the world's automobiles were ford pintos then ford pintos would have the higest accident rating. Malfunction rating, etc. The more of one thing you have the more attention it's shortcomings get.


Factoid # 2: Yes windows is exploited more often than *nix systems. This could be due to the fact that there are 100,000 more kids online with little to no talent other than download a prog. designed to break into windows. ya know that whole "point-n-click" issue again. Security would be a non-issue if we didn't have a bunch of little shit heads trying to "better" the security of the internet. There are actually many more expliots written for *nix systems than there are for windows. The problem is that the KIDS do not have the skill or knowlege to use them.

[hogfly]

This thread is so queer.


:drink:
:umph:

:chuck:
:sleep:

[Quad]

Hog....Does this make you a "flamethrower Clone"?

http://www.antionline.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=87740&perpage=10&pagenumber=3

[FlashOveride]

Originally posted by NoNeckJoe


You would sound so much more intelligent if you got your facts straight *before* posting.


Factoid # 1: Yes windows is the most exploited OS running. This is due to the fact that windows is running more than 85% of the worlds computers. This could be sumed up with the following example.

Example: If 85% of the world's automobiles were ford pintos then ford pintos would have the higest accident rating. Malfunction rating, etc. The more of one thing you have the more attention it's shortcomings get.

My Reply....LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL if you have a fact then you quote the source!! Apparently you just decided to use one of your own little personal analogy.


Factoid # 2: Yes windows is exploited more often than *nix systems. This could be due to the fact that there are 100,000 more kids online with little to no talent other than download a prog. designed to break into windows. ya know that whole "point-n-click" issue again. Security would be a non-issue if we didn't have a bunch of little shit heads trying to "better" the security of the internet. There are actually many more expliots written for *nix systems than there are for windows. The problem is that the KIDS do not have the skill or knowlege to use them.

My reply to this whole message....LOL LOL LOL
I have one for you NoNeck......READ WHAT I WROTE!!!! First off I said that I was a newbie in the security arena. Second the point and click hackers.....well no kidding!!! Thank you for stating the obvious. Third thing lets talk about all the obvious statements that YOU made. Like there are more exploits for Unix........well no kidding it has been around since the beginning. That is not hidden knowledge. As for your example I have no idea of what it has to do with anything that I wrote. You make a good point but really it had very little to do with what I was trying to say.

FACT: The reason that microsoft will fall when it comes to viruses and worms is because it is not OPEN SOURCE.
FOR EXAMPLE: Code Red attacks the buffer overflow and variants of this code will be smarter and change to fight different systems. With Linux everyone can help by making patches and looking at the code. MICROSOFT is all alone to get there programmers to find where their problems lie. Linux has the world to help it!!!

Code Red was not made by a point and click newbie and that is what I am talking about. Who cares about the little programs that they use to hack because those are just a nucsense. Code Red however is what can really hurt a system and the only people that can fix the security problem is microsoft.....scary!! Oh now it is your turn to flame me for this. What can I say I don't mind being told that I am wrong just don't care to be attacked especially when the person attacks because he misread what I wrote. Even worse I was not talking to him/her.

[Quad]

heh.....If I wanted to "flame" you I would. I am just having a rational debate about windows vs. *nix and the security involved.

you keep citing "code red" code red is shit, it drops a trojan on your systems.....ooooh nooooo. ahhhhh! Or DDoS's the whitehouse.....again noooo I 'm so scared for the state of the internet.

You say microsoft is vunerable to viruses because it is open source.....nonsense. It is vunerable because of it's tight integration with a loose scripting language like VBS and WSH.

Have you ever installed Linux or OpenBSD before? Have you ever tried to install in on more than one type of PC? If so then you will understand why people use windows. It is a more refined OS. Period.

[Negative]

One fine day, some bright, clever, goodlooking guy (let's call him WebFlashOver(r?)idedudeguy to make it easy) wrote:

'FACT: The reason that microsoft will fall when it comes to viruses and worms is because it is not OPEN SOURCE.
FOR EXAMPLE: Code Red attacks the buffer overflow and variants of this code will be smarter and change to fight different systems. With Linux everyone can help by making patches and looking at the code. MICROSOFT is all alone to get there programmers to find where their problems lie. Linux has the world to help it!!! '

1. The FACT indeed is a fact.
2. MS is all alone (...) to find where their problems lie. Fact: they wrote a patch for Code Red. Yes they did. They find all the 'problems'? Nope. MS doesn't discover problems, others do (i.e. Code Red: 'someone' discovered a weak spot in ISS, wrote 'something' to exploit it. 'Someone' else discovered that Code Red exploited the weak spot in ISS and told MS. MS wrote the patch.)
3. 'With Linux everyone can help by making patches and looking at the code. ' U want to take a look at the Code Red code? It actually IS OPEN SOURCE, so go ahead! U want to write a patch? Go ahead (bet u don't even know where to begin, but I just guess writing a Windows-patch is easier than a Linux-patch). Does it have to be open source to write programs for it, to write patches for it?
4. Linux has the world to help it? How many people have the knowledge to actually write USEFULL Linux stuff (such as security patches)? Small world that is...
5. Don't mix the terms 'Linux' and 'Unix'. Linux is just a taste (Mr. Torvalds, remember?). Unix has been around quite some time. Linux hasn't.

[FlashOveride]

Ok first off I said Microsoft is not open source.

Since we are debating I can handle that and will address this as a learning experience and not a bashing war.

My reason for citing Code Red is the fact that it is just the beginning to a Buffer Overflow problem that OS systems have.

Interactive Week Aug 6,2001
pg. 14

According to the computer Emergency Response Team, more than 50 percent of the vulnerabilities found in operating systems are due to buffer overflows, and many are attributable to Mircrosoft technology.

Microsoft's software was developed for desktops, where buffer overflows are a minor problem. But with the same desktops now attached to the internet, the problems can leave a gaping hole for hackers to climb through, critics say. - B.P.

This article goes on to say how it is not going to be an easy task to scan millions of lines of code to fix the problem.

Yes I have installed Linux several times including older versions and versions such as Mandrake and Red Hat. With the introduction of these two it is becoming easier for the lamen to put linux on there computer.

Code Red is just the beginning and leading to polymorphic worms. The whole basis of my argument was not to put down Microsoft but to show that because it is a closed source the only people able to fix it are microsoft. I agree with you on several of your points but they had nothing to do with my argument.....or at least so I thought.

My message is this because unix has been around for a long time and is refined by it's users and linux while not as old was modeled after unix and an open source. This makes it a much safer choice even though it is only as secure as the person who installs it.

In closing while I might not be able to do a whole lot in writing patches I would take the Operating System that can be patched by users all over the world over that of any that can only be patched by the employees.

[Negative]

OK, now we're talking!

I only want to add one little thing - about the part where you say 'Yes I have installed Linux several times including older versions and versions such as Mandrake and Red Hat. With the introduction of these two it is becoming easier for the lamen to put linux on there computer.'

There's also the Corel Linux version: even easier to install, BUT (and this is my point) you can hardly call that version open source. As Linux distributions are more and more commercialised, they become easier to work with - almost like Windows. I've also messed around with a lot of distributions, but the Corel one, I don't understand... OK, I got it installed. How? I don't know - almost like Windows.

In the beginning of the MS era, you had DOS (also several distributions, remember?). You could alter it as much as you wanted. Then the Windows story began. You can still alter it, but don't exagerate, or you'll srew it up.
My point again: What's the difference with Linux? It began with the command-line based versions. You could mess with them. But have you ever tried to mess with those GUI-distributions? Face it: everyone wants Linux (fashion!), so they came up with those easy-to-install distributions, wich are just as unsafe as Windows is (why? because they are configured for the majority, and the majority doesn't care/doesn't know about security - almost like Windows!). Windows isn't safe, but understand it, and make it 99 % safe. Linux isn't safe neither, but understand it, and make it 99 % safe.

[pwaring]

Windoze *is* insecure

For one thing, the *nix versions of software such as Apache, Perl etc. are far ahead of windows in terms of security (in fact the Apache group won't even claim that the current win95/nt version is remotely secure and don't recommend it for anything more than personal use).

I admit that there are a lot of games for windows, but with what look to be blockbuster titles such as NeverWinter Nights being ported to Linux, that might not last very long.

The very fact that on windows95/98 all I have to do is Cancel the password prompt, go down to C:\Windows\ and type 'del *.pwl' to delete all the passwords makes it insecure. It's much more difficult to do this under *nix - and it also *forces* you to use passwords and usernames as well!

*nix bugs tend to be patched far quicker than windows. If I found a huge security bug in windows 2000 and told microsoft about it , they'd probably tell me to get lost and either not repair the bug or take ages about it. With *nix I could patch the bug myself or ask someone who could to do it and it would probably be released the same day.

I didn't know that my little original post would generate so much attention! :)

pwaring

[xraystan]

Ok, yes you can just press the cancel button to take you straight into Windows 95/98.
Most home users will probably not even have to do this as they will have it set up to not ask for a user name and password when they start up Windows 95/98.
After all if some one has been messing with your home PC, using the above method, then the chances are you will know them.
Or do you let strangers into your house to use you PC?:what:

In my opinion I think it's a bit unjust to compare Windows 95/98 to *nix. A more like comparison would be *nix versus Windows NT or Windows 2000. These flavours of windows are aimed at the same group of people who would probably think about using a *nix box.
As a side note, just recently, another vulnerability was found in IIS. A lot of people seem to comment that this is another weak point in Windows. Now I'm probably stating the obvious here, but please don't get the two mixed up. IIS is not part of the windows OS it is a separate bit of software.

Now I don't work for Microsoft and it may seem as I'm coming over as some sort of Windows fan boy, but I just hate the fact that a lot of people seem to bash Microsoft and Windows because it seems the thing to do.
These type of blinkered thoughts won't help you to learn anything and you'll just end up looking daft. :dunce:

Finally I've managed to get the :dunce: icon into a post:D

[Louie]

.

[FlashOveride]

Hey Louie...I took both of those classes and they sucked. Anyways thanks for stating the obvious. We all know that no computer is completely secure and that there is one person that is always a step ahead. We however are discussing which ones are the more secure choice and why.

Now how can you say to grow up on the HTML thread then post on here that we need to take a class to learn the obvious. Once again I refer to the above statement.

[Louie]

.

[hogfly]

HAHA....my CIS courses were Pascal and cobol. hrmmmmm......

[Chris]

Originally posted by Louie
I was not talking about your computer.

I meant personally you are all insecure about yourselfs...


ah, a textbook example from louie's new work "How to boost your self-esteem by pointing out other's blatantly obvious flaws"

/me moves all combustible materials away from the forums

:cool:

[Neophyte]

Originally posted by Louie
Your all insecure, it should be a prerequisite for everyone to take CIS100 and CIS 106 before they can post. That would be Introdcution to Computers and Introduction to Windows.

I see that in you cosmopolitan view of the world you have the knowledge to recommend that I take Computer typing skills and introduction to Scientific Calculators. I am glad that these two courses will make me a computer guru like you!

:jack:

[Negative]

I'm a guru too! I'm the guru of Belgian waffles (not to mention Belgian sprouts and endive) . Does that count too? Or should I stick to calculators? Pleaaaaaassssssssssse Louie, teach me how to be a guru! I'd worship you for the rest of my life! And you would be like a guru's guru! And then I could teach other ppl, and they'd become gurus too, and then you would be like the guru's guru's guru! And if that guru would teach other ppl, and they become gurus, I would be like the guru's guru's gurus, and you would be like the guru's guru's guru's guru! So you'll always stay ahead of me, so nothing to worry about!

Will you take this in deep consideration, please?

Yours sincerely,

Negative (guru status still pending).
Yours in guruspace. :duh:

[Louie]

.

[Quad]

Are farts supposed to be lumpy? :(

[Louie]

Depends who you are...mine smell sweet, or so everyone says...

[Negative]

Would you talk to someone who speaks English in French. Why would I want to listen to people who have no idea what they are talking about. Damn it some people here can't even comprehend plain English because they don't take their time to read a whole post.

Who are you referring to, Louie? Would be nice to hear that...
And how can someone 'speak English in French'?

[Louie]

.

[xraystan]

I would if I was french :drink:

[Neophyte]

Originally posted by Louie
It means that if you have someone like me who only speaks English, would you speak in French to them.....

I will point out examples when I have time.

Si vous n'avez rien bon pour signaler, ne signalez pas.

DUDE...Time to unplug man...Get some sun...Summer's almost over.

[Negative]

It means that if you have someone like me who only speaks English, would you speak in French to them.....

Oh! I missed that one...



Si vous n'avez rien bon pour signaler, ne signalez pas.

rien bon? Nothing good is translated rien DE ... and bien is the adverb you're looking for.
Hell, and French only is my 3rd language!

Not bad though for someone who only speaks English!

And I'm looking forward to this examples.

BTW: if my English sucks, feel free to correct. At least I'm pretty sure my English even is better than some of the language produced here by 'some' native speakers. And I'm damn sure my English is better than their Dutch, French and German. And so is my Dutch, French and German.

Yours in languagespace

Negative

[Neophyte]

You didn't even offer louie any vasoline before inserting the flag pole.

[Negative]

Sorry about that, I like it rough :shootem: ...

Il y a des gens qui parlent beaucoup, mais disent rien du tout...

That means something like: There are people who talk a lot, but actually say nothing... (but in French it rhymes).

Na!

[5aboteur]

this thread is getting very far could we go back to the main purpose of this thread

to convert wondoze user to *nix

not to convert english speaking people to french voyeur

[Negative]

this thread is getting very far could we go back to the main purpose of this thread

I guess we could go to the use of interpunction. Seems like a nice thread. Thx for the tip!


to convert wondoze user to *nix


I'm all ears. You're not making any contributions either, besides stating the obvious, are you?

[Quad]

You bunch of ejeet AOLers (With the exception of Louie) don't know what the **** oyu talking about. Quit while you ahead or fjear....!

[Negative]

You bunch of ejeet (sic) AOLers (With the exception of Louie) don't know what the **** oyu talking about. Quit while you ahead or fjear....!

AOL is illegal in Belgium, cause they suck big time. And I damn know what I'm talking about. This thread has been going off-topic for a while (and I contributed to that, yes :cool: ), that's true. It's of course easy to say someone doesn't know what he's talking about. If someone just could make a statement in here, then I could react to that statement. Because now all there's left is to react to this bunch of ejeet (sic) AOLers (but I guess you count me in there, too). What's the topic about, anyway? Unix is safer than Windows? That indeed is a topic for ejeet (sic) AOLers.

[petemcevoy]

Pwaring said:
>For one thing, the *nix versions of software such as Apache, >Perl etc. are far ahead of windows in terms of security (in fact >the Apache group won't even claim that the current win95/nt >version is remotely secure and don't recommend it for anything >more than personal use).

How is the software (?) Perl more secure on the GNU/linux platform(i assume you mean GNU/linux, and not UNIX, telling people to ditch windows and switch to a full blown UNIX system would be laughable), perl is a programming language and interpreter, its not a service in the ftp/http/netbios/telnet sense, obviously exploits have been found in CGI scripts but these are generally not platform specific and would exploitable running on IIS or apache - Perl is only as secure as you tell it be.
As for apache, what win95 version? Where do they make any claims that *ANY* version of apache is for personal use, define "personal use" - anything thats not a massive e-commerce site?

Certainly your idea is laudable, getting people to switch from windows to an open source os, but your methods are flawed.

[Terr]

I'm not defending NT/2000, I don't use it enough to make it a worthwhile discussion, but I'm standing by my feeling that my 98 box is a heck of a lot more secure than you seem to be insinuating, pwaring. I'm not saying *nix ISN'T secure, I'm just saying 98 is better than you are bashing it out to be.

Could you post some more specific assertions about your general idea? So far this is what I'm reading:

"Windows 9x is so insecure, I can hack it with my toenail through a process too long and involved to type here, because most of my post is about how *nix cures cancer and whitens my teeth while I sleep. And did I mention that Bill Gates is the Antichrist? He has horns. Look closely."

:D :rolleyes:

[pwaring]

Originally posted by Terr

"Windows 9x is so insecure, I can hack it with my toenail through a process too long and involved to type here, because most of my post is about how *nix cures cancer and whitens my teeth while I sleep. And did I mention that Bill Gates is the Antichrist? He has horns. Look closely."

>> Took the words right out of my keybord. ;)

pwaring

[pwaring]

Originally posted by NoNeckJoe
You bunch of ejeet AOLers (With the exception of Louie) don't know what the **** oyu talking about. Quit while you ahead or fjear....!

>> Who the f**k do you think you are talking to? And FYI, I'm don't use AOL, instead I have access to 5 seperate net connections 2 of which are ISDN lines are all are either BT, Freeserve or Virgin.net.

>> obviously YOU don't know what you are talking about either.

pwaring.

[Negative]

>> Who the f**k do you think you are talking to?
And FYI, I'm don't use AOL, instead I have access to 5 seperate net connections 2 of which are ISDN lines are all are either BT, Freeserve or Virgin.net.

I'm don't use??? ;) Sorry, you knew this could happen...
And it's separate, not seperate.
BTW: I don't think they have AOL in Great Britain...
And about your 5 connections: good for you. I only have one, and because it's a good one, I don't need another.

obviously YOU don't know what you are talking about either. You should have stressed 'either', not 'you'...

PS: What's 'ejeet' supposed to mean?

[petemcevoy]

Negative said:
BTW: I don't think they have AOL in Great Britain...

Unfortunately, we do have AOL in great britain (and ireland, where i am), and they don't pay tax either - some legal loophole as thier based outside of the UK, freeserve are taking them to court over the matter, they're based in france and they still have to pay tax.

PS: What's 'ejeet' supposed to mean?

"ejeet" is the phonetic spelling of idiot.

[Negative]

Unfortunately, we do have AOL in great britain (and ireland, where i am), and they don't pay tax either - some legal loophole as thier based outside of the UK, freeserve are taking them to court over the matter, they're based in france and they still have to pay tax.
Damn, Paul will flame me for this one!!!
"ejeet" is the phonetic spelling of idiot. I never would have figured that out! Thx, man!

[scab]

Learn the ways of the force to get around the insecurites, the unstableness,the ultra hidden files, the way microsoft tries to spy on you or anyone else. So u should get Red Hat or Free BSD right.NO GOD DAMMIT DON"T LET BILL GATES AND THE MICROCRAP CORPORATION TRY TO **** WITH YOU!!! TAKE BACK YOUR COMPUTER!!!!somtimes windoze is better it's like buying a ****ing honda civic it has the most aftermarket products for it.

They only watch you If you let them.(bastard)
It's not always the case so don't take it out of contect u scum sucking bastards!!!

Don't make me post another reply, please I've been taking hostage by a person who is forcing me to write because he has no fingers and his hand is all scabby,He just wants people to know that he is the master of the world sort of like HE-man and shit. He is a Scorpio, he enjoys long walks on the beach only at sunset, he is very rich and is going around my living room trying to hump my dog.Damn the fool just jumped out the window I going now.

[pwaring]

Originally posted by Negative

Damn, Paul will flame me for this one!!!

>> Nah, I'll let you off this time... ;)