El dom, 30-03-2008 a las 20:13 +1030, Tim escribió: > On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 19:04 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote: > > I blame Microsoft and all the geeks who seem to feel for being geeks > > and want to dumb everything down. > > Those of us who remember personal computing before Microsoft was but > tiny company would probably agree that it was a bad idea to make > computers something the ignorant could play with, they used to be the > domain of experts and people actually interested in computing. Computer > systems need to be much better designed before it's going to be okay for > toy computing, both to protect the ignorant, and everyone else that they > interfere with. Yep, that's why I think that having a good windows administrator and a noob running a Linux server you'll have more possibilities to hack the linux machine than the Windows one. Again, out of the box and running both systems by default, it is obvious that Windows is going to suffer mucho more to keep itself clean. Arthur, this is the third time I say that I'm GLAD that they didn't hack the Linux box, but it doesn't mean that Linux is invincible and Windows can be easily hacked by a dog. There are probably out there servers owned by really good Windows sysadmins which are truly difficult to get compromised, and servers owned by dumb Linux sysadmins that get hacked every single week. Manuel. -- Manuel Arostegui Ramirez. Electronic Mail is not secure, might not be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive issues.
