Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 5th Nov 2010 13:10 UTC
Permalink for comment 448878
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-09-23
http://secunia.com/advisories/product/18255/?task=statistics_2010
http://secunia.com/advisories/product/4668/?task=statistics_2010
Two remarks here:
1. RHEL is far more comprehensive when it comes to software and services shipping than Windows Server. While a Windows Server is more or less naked after installation (except for some server services), a RHEL comes with a huge amount of software available for installation and you have to keep in mind that RedHat is keeping ALL of these packages secure. So, in order to be fair, you'd have to include various software like Microsoft Office and so on in these comparison charts.
2. As opposed to Microsoft, RedHat has patched ALL of the reported vulnerabilities. And this is far more striking than having less vulnerabilities. How do I benefit from less vulnerabilities when around 15% of them remain unpatched?
Adrian