On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Manuel Aróstegui <manuel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > El sáb, 29-03-2008 a las 12:24 -0400, Jim escribió: > > Read article > > That's cool, but it's far to be the real scenario we face everyday. > I guess that Linux box was secure but the truth here, as far as I've > been able to see is that either Windows or Linux (I have no mac > experience) are both pretty insecure if they're been running by a dumb > administrator. > It is clear that a Linux, out of the box, has less chances to be hacked > than a windows in the same situation. > > But for me, this hacking contest does not represent a real scenario. So you're saying a concentrated effort to hack a single machine (only one with Linux) is an easier test than machines randomly on the internet operated by noobs who barely know how to change advanced settings? The arguement is always made that noobs stick with the defaults, most distro defaults are pretty secure. -- Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine ( www.pembo13.com )
