To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"Trollish "zomg linux sucks" ones deserve it, but it seems to me that criticisms which don't constitute trolling lose points very often"
it isn't just linux, but criticism of just about any OS can get you modded down by some fanboy of said OS. I got modded down the other day for saying solaris is slow at compiling apps, and I actually _like_ solaris... (I just tend to prefer linux).
like someone else pointed out, the moderation system, while it can be fun, does unfortunately tend to encourage being overly conservative and cautious in your statements for fear of getting bad votes.
I agree, it's a pity some folks can't distinguish between criticism and trolling.
I don't know what world you live in but this:
No, I am never going to shut up about Linux security, not until the devs stow their stupid "we are teh invulnerable" attitude.
is not "criticism". It's just as bad as your own words "kernel devs and (much moreso) distro maintainers need to realize that Linux can have security issues, and will have more as it gets more popular" since you just simply state Linux devs are ignorant folks with no grip on reality.
I guess Fedora isn't a common distro, as it has MAC (SELinux) implemented by default and I believe other security features as well. Not to say they are perfect, as there is still no extremely easy to use GUI for managing the firewall, and thus, most people seem to have it disabled. I'm hoping the next version of Ubuntu gets a lot of these vital security features enabled as well, such as SELinux and a good firewall application, I believe its on the roadmap for Edgy.
I just think that kernel devs and (much moreso) distro maintainers need to realize that Linux can have security issues, and will have more as it gets more popular.
It kinda depends on what distribution you are using. E.g. Red Hat is pretty proactive when it comes to security:
http://www.redhat.com/magazine/006apr05/features/security/
http://www.redhat.com/magazine/009jul05/features/execshield/




Member since:
2006-05-23
MAC not implemented by default in any form in common distros. Protection against forkbombs via PAM not used by default in any distros I've seen. PaX barely used by anyone, not stable with current kernels on architectures other than x86. Buffer overflows all over the place - VMS and several UNIXes have measures against those.
I'm not saying that Linux is a badly designed kernel, or that distros are poorly designed, or even that Linux is insecure; I just think that kernel devs and (much moreso) distro maintainers need to realize that Linux can have security issues, and will have more as it gets more popular. Developers aren't just sitting there, sure, but I think a bit more needs to be done than just patch up vulnerabilities - innate measures against more common types of vulnerabilities (e.g. buffer overflows) are a good idea.
(BTW, while we're at it... Why do all criticisms of Linux get modded down? Trollish "zomg linux sucks" ones deserve it, but it seems to me that criticisms which don't constitute trolling lose points very often.)