February 11th, 2004, 09:12 PM
If Microsoft wasn't microsoft
I pose a question to all.
We are all conversing on AO, discussing the latest patches and techniques for protecting our networks and machines. Most of us have at one time or another slapped Uncle Bill's Frankenstine around, but this brings me to a question.
If microsoft didn't have 99% of the market wouldn't we all be talking about Steve Job's Frankenstine (god help us) or someone elses Frankenstine?
I know that most of the crack attempts and viruses are focused on Microsoft products, but what I don't here about is *nix viruses or crack attempts. Is it because most crackers/hackers don't care about Mac or *nix machines or is there something special about them that makes them so different that they just don't get pounded?
\"If you know your enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles, you will never be defeated. When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself, your chances of winning or losing are equal. If ignorant of both of your enemy and of yourself, you are sure to be defeated in every battle.\"
February 11th, 2004, 09:34 PM
What are you talking about, there are plenty of attempts on *nix and mac systems not as many as against M$, but there are alot.
Check google. You will come up with plenty. **** I have a book with nothing but exploits and virus's that were for *nix. It is a pretty good book. Got to dig that one up sometime.
The reason that M$ gets hit more is because more people use it.
Let me explain it like this, if you ran a football team and you were playing a team that they had this one Running back that did nothing but run, I mean this guy averaged 60 hand offs a game. What would you do, you would put most of your effort into that one guy that takes up most of the Market/running. Now you still have this other running back that runs alot but not as much as the other one.
I hope that helps you understand. Though trust me there is alot of effort put into *nix cracks and exploits.
February 12th, 2004, 01:23 AM
It is a volume industry?
Windows and IE have the volume, so they get the attention?
Hey come looking for my RISC machine some day
February 12th, 2004, 05:58 AM
Hmm, considering only a handfull of *NIX virii even exist, and most are proof of concept, I think that may have something to do with it. And even though I don't want to admit it, Mac is very secure. But I still hate them as a company. Maybe if they dropped those damn price tags down I would try them. But paying $3,000.00.....No, I could buy like 5 PCs for that price.
And yes, I do believe *NIX is more secure than Windows. If you took every version of Windows, and every version od *NIX, Windows would be alot more insecure than the *NIX OSs. As most say, Open BSD is the most secure OS in the world. Also, alot of secure/trusted systems exist that are UNIX variants.
I have yet to see a Trusted Windows.
February 12th, 2004, 06:38 AM
Windows was always designed to make the life easy for end users by offering cutting edge GUI.....
It was meant to even let a lame user use the PC and conduct common activities with almost no configuration.... Anything goes wrong CTRl -ALT - DEL and you are back to your work... Even if machine restarts on its own.. no problems majority of time.. Windows will boot after running the Scandisk (most of the time)
Other OS are never so user friendly... They had lot of configuration to be made..... and in short needed some level of expertise to use the system.. offlate there are good GUI for Linux..
Again MS binds with almost all the majproty of hardware available today... I have known how long it takes to set the printer on linux.... especially if u are using a custom printer... It had actually taken us 2 weeks to search for a driver..... All this implies that MS products comes with lot of per-configuration.. which surely shall live some doors opens.....
Imagine.. A situation u are developing a stadium....
Now for ease if you create say 100 entry doors.... all this doors also become a source of vulnerability.... I guess u have to apply the law of demand and supply .... How much of comfort do I desire and how much of compromise Am it willing to do.....
Nihil rightly mentioned... It is a volume business.... MS is undoubtedly the most popular OS atleast on the Desktop front.....
MS is undisputed leader in Office Automation ......
MS is a major player in Email programs
MS is a leader for Internet Browsers....
Incidentally it also ends up being a target of many hackers........
****** Any man who knows all the answers most likely misunderstood the questions *****
February 12th, 2004, 06:59 AM
I'd be an bit if if to say that about browsers. Alot of people are using open source browsers now. Mozilla has become popular, and so has Opera. And good ol links is still around too. Also, people use the AOL browser, for the poor bastards who use AOL.
And e-mail...Na, *NIX has alot more email clients than Microsoft, and they work much better.
Anyone remember when Microsoft had the FAQs thing on their site? When it admitted that Outlook spread virii like a cheap whore? Lol, that was great "It is unceratin if any other email clients allow viruses to spread themselves as Outlook does. Check with the company that makes your email program to be sure".
That was taken down quickly.
Pine, Mutt, Kmail, and Ximian are my favorite email programs, and I use them daily. I like something about each one of of them, and so I use them all.
February 12th, 2004, 08:49 AM
correct me if Im wrong
I think what Bio was reffering more too is not so much why/how/etc microsoft has so many exploits, its that hackers tend to snicker and sneer when a MS exploit is realeased, but act like *nix has nothing wrong with it etc. I may be way off though hehe....
February 12th, 2004, 09:03 AM
I agree whislersec, when Windows has an updated patch or exploit the *nix(*BSD) zealots go nuts. But when a *nix(*BSD) distro releases a patch or is discovered to have an exploit, they worry more about patching their servers than the windows users saying to them "And your mocking us why? Because you never have exploits?" So point taken, and I completely agree with Bio.
February 12th, 2004, 03:00 PM
Microsoft---> Discovers vulnerability, releases no information. 6+ months later, a patch is released.
*nix--> Discovers vulnerability, releases all information. Within 24h, 85% of the *nix computers world-wide are patched. Within a week, 97% of those patches.
THAT's the difference.
All OSes need patches, and all OSes have vulnerabilities. Microsoft is just inept at handling them.
February 12th, 2004, 06:18 PM
I would like very much so to see where you get those statistics, and with that information bringing the bugs on bugzilla/trak that are 8 - 9 months old for gaim and various other peices of software.