Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Sat 19th Jul 2008 19:01 UTC, submitted by cypress
Linux Linux and UNIX-like operating systems in general are regarded as being more secure for the common user, in contrast with operating systems that have "Windows" as part of their name. Why is that? When entering a dispute on the subject with a Windows user, the most common argument he tries to feed me is that Windows is more widespread, and therefore, more vulnerable. Apart from amusing myths like "Linux is only for servers" or "does it have a word processor?", the issue of Linux desktop security is still seriously misunderstood.
Thread beginning with comment 323716
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
At least no registry no sucks
by rockmen1 on Sun 20th Jul 2008 01:39 UTC
Member since:

For UNIX/Linux, they just rely on plain text startup/configuration files. Even if virus affect these systems, from the modification time, we can see what files have been changed, then we can dig the virus out.

Reply Score: 3