Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 19:12 -0700, jdow wrote:
Another reason Linux appears more secure than windows is
'tis the attitude, too. In ix-land, if there's a fault, it's considered
a bad thing that *must* be fixed. Windows-land has the attitude of not
bothering unless it's seen to really be a problem that can't be worked
around in some manner.
And more to the point, in Windows the flaws are often in things that
users have no idea are running and no way to turn them off. How many
exploits in various rpc functions doing some unknown administrative
operations that you can't turn off have there been? Even worse is the
update mechanism wrapped inside of that most insecure activeX capability
that you'd rather disable.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
