Wonderful Microsoft

Hi there
Perhaps it's time for Ms to sit down and really work out a totally NEW way of implementing Windows security.

I've been running LINUX for years and never had the slightest problem with security / viruses etc etc -- that's not to say it can't be hacked but it's so much harder to do, and I've used some of those dubious sites in the past.

If you add in the fact that pretty well all Linux flavours is open source so any would be hacker has access to the entire kernel, GUI etc etc it shows the base system must be pretty resilient.

Maybe Windows should start by becoming Open Source -- most of the money Ms makes these days are from providing consultancy, networking, and various other services plus a lot of work in Robotics, X-boxes, VR etc etc. I think Office is the biggest money spinner for software these days.

With Open source a lot of defects would easily be cleared up pretty quickly.

Cheers
jimbo

CountMike said:

But that could also create a chaos with hundreds of distros and compatibility problems Linux faces. In my mind, that's only problem with Linux, no organization and concentrated effort with wide system incompatibility of SW. Professional Linux sorts prove that it could be done by concentrated effort done professionally but that's not free.

HI there
@CountMike

actually TWO good Enterprise versions of Linux are available FREE -- they are identical to the robust commercial Enterprise server products. (There might be others but these are nr 1 and nr 2 in this type of environment).

1) My favourite --CENTOS - based on and supported by RED HAT - servers in use all over the world - very stable and almost unbreakable. Identical code to the paid for RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise Linux) version. The only difference is that you have to support it yourself.

2) OPENSUSE - based on SLES (SUSE enterprise server) also very good -- slightly more "leading edge" but also stable.

I agree for the vast majority there are so many distros etc that it would be a real "Dogs Dinner" to get any sort of standards -- however it does show that even with many many different distributions security isn't a mega problem like there is with Windows -- that's the area that Ms needs to fix -- even Networking which was a pain with any release of Windows seems to be operating OK these days !!!.

Other hacks like Denial of Service etc aren't the security of the OS itself but of Network access so any site is a potential target for that type of attack.

The other thing about Linux though - if someone say needs a DVD player etc - then it usually appears due to some dedicated hobbyists writing an application and is free. Windows does have a problem that there are all sorts of copyright issues -- how VLC hasn't been threatened with a zillion lawsuits over the DVD CSS de-scrambling and region by-passes I don't know -.

All in all Ms actually does a decent job considering the hugely varying types of users and the equipment they have. A lot of the security breaches though could be avoided if users THEMSELVES were more aware of the increasing sophistication of scams and frauds out there -- not all of which can be caught via Software protection.

I really think though Ms do need to beef up their QA a bit of course !!!!!.

Cheers
jimbo

CountMike said:

My favorite is Mint (any flavor) just for shear SW base if nothing else. Also have OpenSUSE in a VM but Mint is still on a USB as live with perstinence and loaded with utilities. Practically irreplaceable for troubleshooting computers and accessing otherwise unreachable data on them and disks.

Hi there

good for that purpose - however I run mine as a server, my own VPN, Internet gateway, file and media server for windows clients and mail server so for me a robust standard server which is easy to run headless and rarely if ever needs re-booting is my "Weapon of choice".

I agree though Mint with a load of utilities on a USB stick can just about repair any computer in the known universe (assuming it's not a mega hardware defect).

Servers do need to be locked down -- but even with Windows the firewall should be ON and I'm also amazed that most people don't look at a good source of info --the router logs will be an excellent indication of "dubious" outbound and inbound requests.

Cheers
jimbo

alphanumeric said:

Hackers go for the biggest target. There are a lot more Windows systems out there than there are Linux systems.

Yes, but they also go for the notoriety of being the one who brought down all of the Linux servers. They may not be the dominant platform on the desktop, but the Internet is another story altogether.

alphanumeric said:

I don't think Linux is any easier or harder to hack than Windows, there's just less of those system out there.

Linux came from Unix, which came out as a multi-user operating system since day 1. Security has been ongoing in the Linux/Unix platform for like 40 years. It wasn't that long ago that all Windows users were Admins by default. No wonder we had lots of problems.

In addition, Windows can be a bit too easy. Click a few things and viola, it's running. Linux takes more effort, which usually means you prepare a bit better. If you put in the prep work, you learn about the security and make it secure right out of the gate. People don't usually accidentally get a Linux box up and running Apache. But many a person has installed Windows server, got IIS installed and then got Pwned because they had absolutely 0 security.

And Windows users want to do everything as Admin. Look at the people who scoff over the use of UAC. But a UAC like system is tantamount in Mac as well as Linux. You run as a standard user and elevate up for only what you need. But Windows people be like, "I haz admin skillz, i won't do no UAC, I haz no n33d5 for helpz".