Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 15th Apr 2009 09:54 UTC
Bugs & Viruses Whenever the Conficker worm comes up here on OSNews (or any other site for that matter) there are always a number of people who point their fingers towards Redmond, stating that it's their fault Conifcker got out. While Microsoft has had some pretty lax responses to security threats in the past, it handled the whole Conficker thing perfectly, releasing a patch even before Conficker existed, and pushing it through Windows Update. In any case, this made me wonder about Linux distributions and security. What if a big security hole pops up in a Linux distribution - who will the Redmond-finger-pointing people hold responsible?
Permalink for comment 358645
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Common sense
by chekr on Wed 15th Apr 2009 12:19 UTC
chekr
Member since:
2005-11-05

If you are a corporation/company then it its your responsibility to ensure your systems are reasonably secure. For most companies this risk/responsibility would be outsourced to a vendor for a fee (Red Hat, Novell, Sun etc)

For private users if you're paying for commercial support then once again its the vendor, if you're not then it's your own responsibility.

The community is usually responsive enough in and of itself but this still doesn't change the fact that people must be responsible for their own lives.

Reply Score: 4