Is Windows more secure than BSD/Gnu/Linux/UNIX?

Quote:

---

If this wasn't a problem in WINDOWS, then why would microsoft have addressed it in service pack 2 for outlook express? hmm?

---

You are still talking about applications and not the OS.. If it was an OS problem it would have been fixed in an OS service pack.. And most recent MM virii have taken to other methods of getting email addresses because it is not as easy to get them from the outlook address book. You also have a huge base of windows products out there that are not patched. This is not the fault of the OS, its a user issue.

The ability of a 3rd party product to pick up and detect a new virus has nothing at all to do with the quality of the OS... If you think linux is attacked less based purely on the "quality" of the OS you are mistaken. I don't want to get to far off topic, but you are talking about things that end up being more of an end user issue, than an issue of the OS. I've still not heard what it is that is wrong with the OS from a security standpoint in comparison with a *nix system. And do realize, I have experience with both systems in corporate networks. I like both systems, and understand, like most people, that the security of the system depends on who is behind the keyboard. If you were running a properly patched system, and don't open untrusted content, the quality of the AV scanner shouldn't matter at all.

Well lets see., More programs in the free area, some better than word and excel. And if a fix is needed it comes in hours not months. The platform once it is set up correctly is as steady as a rock. Did I say more programs? I hope this helps you in your quest.

Quote:

---

And if a fix is needed it comes in hours not months. ... [/B]

---

I would like to see that. On RH? Debian? SUSE? hours? not likely

And talking about support..... as soon as a new release comes the prior one just get abandoned.... try to get a patch for RH 7.x...

Quote:

---

The platform once it is set up correctly is as steady as a rock.... [/B]

---

As Windows. But people just think that Windows is just "Next, next, finished" and never try to go deeply to understand it, in special Registry entries.

Registry is Hard?

Just like tuning Linux

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by cacosapo
I would like to see that. On RH? Debian? SUSE? hours? not likely

And talking about support..... as soon as a new release comes the prior one just get abandoned.... try to get a patch for RH 7.x...



As Windows. But people just think that Windows is just "Next, next, finished" and never try to go deeply to understand it, in special Registry entries.

Registry is Hard?

Just like tuning Linux

---

Yea, because if you have RedHat 7.X as a few members here have, you can't download the patch yourself and install it right?

The Registry and configuring Linux are no where near the same. BSD and Linux use plain text files, the registry is a curse from Hell.

Oh...I was one of those poor souls who had RedHat 7.x. :) I upgraded to 9.0, but then I couldn't get the dang updates to finish. I left it sitting a whole day and it never would complete, and that's on DSL...I'm not sure what the deal was, may have been a "User error. Replace user." kinda error.

Anyway, which incarnation of Linux would you guys recommend for an old box with really. really low memory? I have Redhat 9.0 on it now (not the same installation from the prior paragraph), but it's so pathetically low on memory that I could only install text-based Linux, so no GUI for me.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by AngelicKnight
Oh...I was one of those poor souls who had RedHat 7.x. :) I upgraded to 9.0, but then I couldn't get the dang updates to finish. I left it sitting a whole day and it never would complete, and that's on DSL...I'm not sure what the deal was, may have been a "User error. Replace user." kinda error.

---

Have you tried updating Redhat 7.3 or 9.x via the fedora lagacy project?
www.fedoralegacy.org
Supports either APT or YUM
You can find many package updates there.
Not sure of the longevity of the project but for the short term it may suffice..??

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by AngelicKnight


Anyway, which incarnation of Linux would you guys recommend for an old box with really. really low memory? I have Redhat 9.0 on it now (not the same installation from the prior paragraph), but it's so pathetically low on memory that I could only install text-based Linux, so no GUI for me.

---

... Run level 3 perhaps?

Type this:

init 3

You could also use a simpler gui such as fluxbox.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by mohaughn
You are still talking about applications and not the OS.. If it was an OS problem it would have been fixed in an OS service pack.. And most recent MM virii have taken to other methods of getting email addresses because it is not as easy to get them from the outlook address book. You also have a huge base of windows products out there that are not patched. This is not the fault of the OS, its a user issue.

The ability of a 3rd party product to pick up and detect a new virus has nothing at all to do with the quality of the OS... If you think linux is attacked less based purely on the "quality" of the OS you are mistaken. I don't want to get to far off topic, but you are talking about things that end up being more of an end user issue, than an issue of the OS. I've still not heard what it is that is wrong with the OS from a security standpoint in comparison with a *nix system. And do realize, I have experience with both systems in corporate networks. I like both systems, and understand, like most people, that the security of the system depends on who is behind the keyboard. If you were running a properly patched system, and don't open untrusted content, the quality of the AV scanner shouldn't matter at all.

---

Considering how outlook express is installed by default in a windows xp deployment I disagree that it isn't part of the OS. IE is also considered part of microsoft operating system and that comes from the horses ass er..mouth. yet it is an "application" . We both know how many problems exist there. If you deny that one, then you lose the right to debate this topic.

Most are pulling it from other files yes. But look here.. Mydoom.P Yes P, the most recent...Item 7. Retrieves the email addresses from the Windows Address Book files. (symantec.com) What the hell does that say? Yes that's right the address book in WINDOWS.

You are right. AV has nothing to do directly with the operating system. yet if the operating system wasn't riddled with issues then agobot wouldn't be at version BAJ.(gaobot.BAJ). Yes this is a user issue because these systems are not patched. However if the operating system didn't use such a backhanded RPC communication system, this wouldn't be a problem. And you don't have to open untrusted content to get infected by worms. They spread by themselves. Considering that AV is required these days as a precaution, I'd have to say it matters a hell of a lot in a windows environment. If windows wasn't a virus breeding ground then viruses wouldn't be an issue. Yes linux has had worms viruses and it has more than it's fair share of rootkits, but I can stick an openbsd box on the net, totally unprotected, and it won't get hacked. if I throw a windows box up without AV and a firewall, and keep netbios enabled, that box will be compromised in 30 seconds to 2 minutes. yes, I have done that testing. As I will continue to point out, SP2 is a vast improvement, and it has already changed my opinion about the security in windows. It's only taken microsoft 20 years.

To be perfectly frank I don't care if you have corporate experience with both. That's pretty much a given in this industry. I wouldn't have these opinions if I didn't admin and maintain linux,bsd,and windows boxes.

People are saying nothing is 100% secure.... what if i have no ports open, no services running, am immune to social engineers, all updated ,and a strong password? Surely thats 100% secure.

Windows is more probable to get malware, but linux is a multi user OS, so somebody could break in and do whatever they want. Doesn't really work in Windows.