Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Sep 2005 12:32 UTC, submitted by vinref
GNU, GPL, Open Source "The growing popularity of open-source browsers and software may be responsible for the increasing gap between the exposure of a vulnerability and the provision of patch to fix it, security software vendor Symantec has said."
Thread beginning with comment 33450
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
BS
by on Mon 19th Sep 2005 16:05 UTC

Member since:

This is BS.

But their suggestion that windows is as secure as mac and mozilla browsers is valid. Windows may be more secure based on the idea that since it's so popular its targeted more and thus is patched better.

I assume that if mozilla became 99% of browser market and mac OS jumped up there it would be the same.

The truth is.... choose whatever companies releases patches FASTER and what your comfortable with.

would that be.... mac and firefox? HMmmmmmm

i choose 'em!

RE: BS
by on Mon 19th Sep 2005 17:07 in reply to "BS"
Member since:

If what you say is correct then why is the only OS spreading worms and viruses and spyware and adware Windows?

I've never got any of those problems on OSX or Linux. And I run Linux without a firewall, antivirus software, or any kind of protection from these types of exploits. Hell, I even run it unpatched. I don't dare run Windows unpatched. That would be asking for trouble.

I know countless Windows users who do purchase these products to protect their system and still get compromized.

How do I know so many Windows users? I'm a systems administrator. I know everything about our systems and networks.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 0

RE[2]: BS
by on Mon 19th Sep 2005 22:50 in reply to "RE: BS"
Member since:

my point is whatever is popular will always have more exploits.

mac and firefox are just gaining in popularity.

that or children are getting bored these days.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 0

RE: BS
by ma_d on Mon 19th Sep 2005 20:27 in reply to "BS"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

If you are correct, then IIS is horribly insecure and no one should switch to it ;) .

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1

RE: BS
by Celerate on Tue 20th Sep 2005 05:04 in reply to "BS"
Celerate Member since:
2005-06-29

Interesting you should say that since Microsoft has frequently ignored security holes and left problems unpatched for months or even years even though there were already exploits in the wild.

Windows can be made more secure though firewalls and AV software, but then Linux is already solid and usually comes with a firewall installed by default. I thought maybe Windows could include a good firewall with the OS by default too, but then they would either get sued by company A and B for including their own product, or get sued by company B for including company A's product in Windows. In some cases Microsoft might not be able to win no matter what.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1