Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Dec 2005 16:32 UTC, submitted by Valour
Linux "There is a lot of confusing information about the GNU/Linux operating system, open source and free software, and related issues in the press today. Many of these technologies and concepts are difficult to understand because they deviate from the standard historical traditions of the software industry. There are also a number of sponsored reports and other corporate propaganda published around the Web that smear the image of Linux and free software. In the interest of making a few basic concepts clear, this article will bring light to the darkness perpetuated by uninformed journalists, campaigning CEOs, and misleading advertisements."
Thread beginning with comment 75751
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
smashIt
Member since:
2005-07-06

sorry to quote you on this:

Get your facts straight, friend, then we can debate the merits of what's out there.

but

If you can't lock down the directory with the binaries/executables in it, you'll have the nightmare situation that most Windows users suffer from today.
is plain wrong

it seems to me that you never got beyound the simplified file-permissions in windows.
the dark side is like this ;) : http://temp.funtech.org/permissions.PNG

Reply Parent Score: 1

Member since:

No, the problem isn't file permissions or directory structure, its that Windows users often have administrator priveledges and uses these priveledges to execute code with or without the end user's permission. This code often is included as an attachment in an email or as an executable file downloaded from the internet or as the payload of a worm. The end results are the same. Your system files get replaced by trojans and viruses that give other users the impression your system is insecure because it keeps getting compromised.

Perhaps PBKAC is an acceptable explanation for you, but I prefer to believe the problem is not with all these dumb users who can't keep their proprietary systems secure, it lies with Microsoft for not doing what they know was necessary to secure the system before they released XP. By the time Vista is released, Vista might be secure, but XP, without a firewall, virus and spyware scanner, is not.

Don't complain on here how Linux should be less secure because its source code is open. The facts speak for themselves. Go check the facts if don't know them. Don't make us point out the obvious. At least provide a logical excuse for all the Windows worms if you want to argue its security. You can't blame security on the end users of a proprietary system. They, at the very least, need access to the source code to take security into their own hands. Seriously.

Reply Parent Score: 1