Linked by Eugenia Loli-Queru on Fri 7th Dec 2007 06:34 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 289516
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Linux on the Desktop
by raver31 on Sat 8th Dec 2007 08:59
in reply to "RE[3]: Linux on the Desktop"
RE[5]: Linux on the Desktop
by wirespot on Sat 8th Dec 2007 16:02
in reply to "RE[4]: Linux on the Desktop"







Member since:
2006-06-21
You've made not one but two grave errors here.
First, what you said is simply wrong. No, as a Linux user I don't get any kind of malware, from anywhere. My system is clean. It's not like the malware executables get on my HDD but they won't run, I don't get any stuff I don't want period.
Your second error has to do with a very dumb and outdated concept of what security is supposed to be about. Sadly, you are not alone. Most of the companies selling you security for Windows share your point of view. That point is that it's normal for malware to enter the system and that efforts should be made to contain it after that happens. I'm sorry but that's extremely stupid.
I much prefer the Linux or Mac OS X method, which says "malware doesn't enter, period". Isn't that much simpler? Why bother to track thousands of pieces of malware, dozens appearing every day, when you can simply make sure nothing gets in and be done with it?
Why do you think Macs and Linux are so secure? By dumb luck? No. They're secure because they're designed to be secure. They haven't approached security saying "I'll just let everything in my system and see what I can salvage later."