Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 10th Mar 2006 12:29 UTC, submitted by Moule
Privacy, Security, Encryption It's official, boys and girls: it's easier to kick in a door when it's open. "A test has revealed that a Linux server is far less likely to be compromised. In fact, unpatched Red Hat and SuSE servers were not breached at all during a six-week trial, while the equivalent Windows systems were compromised within hours. However, patching does make a difference. Patched versions of Windows fared far better, remaining untouched throughout the test, as did the Red Hat and Suse deployments."
Permalink for comment 103173
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Confusing
by DrillSgt on Fri 10th Mar 2006 14:49 UTC in reply to "Confusing"
DrillSgt
Member since:
2005-12-02

"If the former, then it's slightly unfair. Last time I checked, there aren't many automated trojans/worms/etc that are actively scanning networks for holes in Linux boxes, especially vendor-specific stuff."

This is a good point, but don't discount the manual scanners. There are people out there that scan entire networks to find *nix machines with security holes so they can install a rootkit. True that it is not automated, but it actually makes it more serious, as there is thinking behind it.

Reply Parent Score: 1