on 7/22/2007 5:55 PM, monty19@ hotmail.com wrote: > >Sounds like you have limited experience with doz "security". Malware > >that targets its security flaws is extraordinarily easy to acquire in > >doz, and difficult to eradicate, short of reinstalling the whole OS > and >apps. It's even possible (easy, so I hear) > > So you admit you have no actual experience to counter his 'limited' > experience... > > >to acquire malware in the interval between installation and completion > >of installing security updates online from M$. > > Do you really think that given adequate access (i.e. throw it up on the > internet with no firewall) to a Linux system with known vulnerabilities > this would not also be possible between the interval you install that > system and manage to update it? What makes you believe then that Windows > should magically behave any better. > > Of course, you can spin an updated install disk with the latest packages > so that this is not the case with your Linux system. Of course, you can > slipstream the install for any of Microsoft's more recent operating > systems and expect the same. > > Look, I am no fan of a lot of Microsoft's business and marketing > tactics; Microsoft has been inching it's way out of my computing > experience slowly but surely over the last couple years. But this is the > same kind of FUD Microsoft likes to spread about any of the *nix > operating systems. > > A generic Fedora 7, Fedora 6, Fedora 5, (how far do you want to go > back), Solaris, Mac OS X, etc. install is likely to have security flaws > prior to being updated that are remotely exploitable under the proper > circumstances. > > If you don't use yum or a similar tool to install any security updates > to your Fedora installation, fail to run a firewall, and carelessly > click on links, and open unexpected email attachments then you are no > better than the masses of Windows users who fail to install their > windows updates, fail to run a firewall, and carelessly click on links, > and open unexpected email attachments. > > The difference is that because you are not running Windows you will > probably go just a bit longer than them before managing to infect your > system with one form of malware or another, only because most malware > written today is directed at the much larger number of Windows computers > out there. > > I run Mac OS X on my laptop and linux on everything else, resorting to > Windows Vista for only an occasional game that I might want to play with > friends. i might run Windows once a week tops. > > However, my wife uses Windows exclusively. She has no real interest in > Linux, Mac OS X, and so on. She is diligent about installing those > Critical and Recommended Windows updates, has the basic Windows Firewall > set up, and uses common sense when browsing the web and reading email. > She has NEVER had a problem with viruses, spyware, pop-ups, or any other > form of malware. > > Conversely I have seen Linux and even Mac users who believe their system > is an iron fortress simply for the fact that they are not running > Windows, only to find root kits and other nastiness installed on their > system down the road. > > And people will cry that the only way in which you can correct an > infected Windows system is to reinstall the operating system, but I > would argue that from my professional and personal experience that 99% > of the time this is completely untrue. Again, do you really believe that > when a system becomes infected with this garbage that there is no sound, > technical, and methodical manner in which you can remove these programs, > and restore the system? There are some truely nasty pieces of malware > out there that will employ tactics such as attempting to reinstall > themselves if all components are not removed, etc. I have had a > miserable time cleaning up more than a few of these, but I have never > had to give up on a machine and reinstall it, though time wise it may > have been just as effective to reinstall one or two of them. > > Oh, and how does most of this start? User browses to website X and > recieves popup Y that says you can get this absolutely nifty free > program that installs super cool item Z (instant message icons, games, > screensavers, and whatever crap), and Joe user thinks hey, what a great > deal, and goes on and install it beginning the mess... > > Really, your poorly informed arguments do nothing for improving the > cause of Linux. > > With respect, > Jason > > P.S. I believe the operating systems name is Windows, not 'doz'; > demeaning a product or making silly attacks against its name really are > no way to make your case against the company. Clap. Clap. Well said -- David
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
