Linked by David Adams on Tue 22nd Jun 2010 16:14 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Privacy, Security, Encryption A Computerworld editorial takes note of some interesting changes Dell made to the Linux page we linked to last week. They watered down some of their pro-Linux claims, but not as far as you might think.
Permalink for comment 431177
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: From the article ...
by nt_jerkface on Wed 23rd Jun 2010 06:40 UTC in reply to "RE: From the article ..."
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26


Linux has no "binary backwards compatibility" or "legacy poor-security garbage design" to stick to. At least, not nearly to the extent Microsoft products do. And it has no real, market-driven (commercial) reason to.


Malware that is injected into warez is not taking advantage of backwards compatibility. It has nothing to do with "legacy poor-security garbage design" either. There is no isolation layer within Linux that would protect it from a trojan injected into an executable.

If Linux users were the majority and millions of them were carelessly downloading crap from unverified sources then you would have far more trojans like the one in the Unreal IRCd.
http://www.jfplayhouse.com/2010/06/trust-us-that-linux-trojan-is-no...

Malware today is mostly the product of computer criminals within Eastern Europe looking to profit, not from pricks who are looking to hack for the sake of it.

Edited 2010-06-23 06:47 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4