Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Windows isn't so bad!

  1. June 12th, 2002, 12:45 PM #1
    DeepBlueMagic
    DeepBlueMagic is offline
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    22

    Talking Windows isn't so bad!

    Many people is saying that Windows have many security-holes but i can find any in a clean install of Windows XP or 2k. I can find much more holes in Linux than Windows (on the web). Doesn't that mean windows is a secure OS??
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. June 12th, 2002, 12:50 PM #2
    Conf1rm3d_K1ll
    Conf1rm3d_K1ll is offline
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    1,253
    I can find much more holes in Linux than Windows


    Show me proof!
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. June 12th, 2002, 12:58 PM #3
    prodikal
    prodikal is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,050
    i use a windows box and im desperately tring 2 get rid of it because of security flaws well hope i have linux by the weekend
    By the sacred **** of the sacred psychedelic tibetan yeti ....We\'ll smoke the chinese out
    The 20th century pharoes have the slaves demanding work
    http://muaythaiscotland.com/
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. June 12th, 2002, 01:02 PM #4
    Leviatan
    Leviatan is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    236
    Well Linux may be safe but but not secure, a secure OS would be OpenBSD.
    But then again, really advanced Linux professionals can customize they're linux system to be really secure, so I guess it depends on the user or the person who administers the box.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  6. June 12th, 2002, 01:09 PM #5
    DeepBlueMagic
    DeepBlueMagic is offline
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    22
    Originally posted here by Conf1rm3d_K1ll


    Show me proof! [/B]
    It's very easy! Just search the web or read Hacking Exposed.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  7. June 12th, 2002, 01:09 PM #6
    souleman
    souleman is offline
    AntiOnline Senior Member souleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Flint, MI
    Posts
    2,883
    A default install of any OS is not secure (except for OpenBSD). There are 2 primary differences between Windows and Linux (or other open source software).

    1> Being open source, you can customize anything. If you find a security flaw, you can fix it yourself. With Windows you have to wait for a vendor patch.

    2> Being open source, holes are patched a LOT faster. It takes windows approximatly 2 to 3 weeks to patch a vulnerabilty while it takes linux less the 48 hours (normally around 24 hours).
    \"Ignorance is bliss....
    but only for your enemy\"
    -- souleman
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  8. June 12th, 2002, 01:13 PM #7
    souleman
    souleman is offline
    AntiOnline Senior Member souleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Flint, MI
    Posts
    2,883
    It's very easy! Just search the web
    Google search for windows exploits 125,000 results
    Google search for linux exploits 84,600 reslutls

    Ok, good proof
    \"Ignorance is bliss....
    but only for your enemy\"
    -- souleman
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  9. June 12th, 2002, 01:17 PM #8
    Und3ertak3r
    Und3ertak3r is offline
    The Doctor Und3ertak3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    2,744
    [rubbish]
    hmm a bit of a pot calling a kettle black...

    or is that a bit like turning up at the GMH factory and extoling the virtues of FORD..

    hmm I think I got that last one the wrong way around..

    or comparing the towing performance of a Mini with a F250..

    [/rubbish]

    When I last thought that I had my XP box secured.. I learned I missed a simple one .. my toaster tried to join my network, gee it was bad enough with the fridge and stove... what next the Mixmaster.. j/k
    Yep uPnP is now disabled.. now that is normal in a CLEAN install..

    Know your systems weakness, and never never assume all is well.. Regardless of O/S

    Cheers
    "Consumer technology now exceeds the average persons ability to comprehend how to use it..give up hope of them being able to understand how it works." - Me http://www.cybercrypt.co.nr
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  11. June 12th, 2002, 01:23 PM #9
    Cojonudo
    Cojonudo is offline
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    27
    I agree with you, souleman, but it´s also true that win2k or XP are a great improvement to the not very secure NT
    Cojunudo
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  12. June 12th, 2002, 02:04 PM #10
    souleman
    souleman is offline
    AntiOnline Senior Member souleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Flint, MI
    Posts
    2,883
    With uPnP turned on by default you consider XP a security improvement over NT? Remember we are talking about default installs.. And even after patching the entire system, NT is a lot more tested then either 2K or XP. Threre are still a LOT more holes to find in both OS's, yet NT is pretty much worked over. But I wasn't trying to argue NT vs 2K/XP, I am arguing ANY open source vs ANY closed source. Microsoft vs. Linux is just the example that DBM used, so I went with it....
    \"Ignorance is bliss....
    but only for your enemy\"
    -- souleman
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Forum Rules