Why Linux Is More Secure Than Windows

"Security through obscurity" may be a catchy phrase, but it's not the only thing that's catching among Windows users.

The expression is intended to suggest that proprietary software is more secure by virtue of its closed nature. If hackers can't see the code, then it's harder for them to create exploits for it--or so the thinking goes.

Unfortunately for Windows users, that's just not true--as evidenced by the never-ending parade of patches coming out of Redmond. In fact, one of Linux's many advantages over Windows is that it is more secure--much more. For small businesses and other organizations without a dedicated staff of security experts, that benefit can be particularly critical.

“The problem in C (et al) is the concept of an “data-bounded” string, ie, the NULL termination of strings.”

Yes, this is a common problem - a programming problem that later programmers expect compilers to correct. It is too bad that bad programmers have given this problem its name.

And no, most programmers today have no idea how to code the segment in assembly language - after all, that is what high level languages are about. Don’t expect that schools teach assembly equivalent to these high level language students.

“Being that C is little more than a high-level assembler, there is little to no checking of constraints at run time, because there are few constraints encoded in the source.”

Very TRUE! That is exactly “C” or “C++” is still in vogue. It retains the ability to go low level where most high level languages do not.

“There is no run-time array bounds checking in C and C-derived languages unless you add in the facility yourself.”

Sorry, that is a Compiler problem and has been much improved in recent years - not like my younger days.

“Ada provides run-time constraint checking; when you try to overwrite the end of strings, the run time system throws an exception.”

Yes, but it does add overhead and sometimes poor compilation but what the heck, it’s a government issue... Of course, it does not allow the lower level handling that is built into C either...

“What Ada brings to the table is strong type checking, strong run time checking and strong exception handling. For a C programmer converting to Ada, getting his first program to compile and link is like getting a root canal.”

Sorry, that is a programmer problem that your are describing, not a language issue...

“When you develop with Ada, the compiler barks at you again and again,”

Of course, what you are saying is that as a programmer, you need Compiler help in creating the correct code because you are not up to speed...

“I’ve developed s/w for more than 25 years, in over a dozen languages and on a dozen+ operating systems.”

Well, then I would expect that you could program in any language with problems - no need to the compiler to catch your laziness...

Heh, that is really funny... Almost all of my work has been with a team of 10 to 20 programmers (telecommunications) - every time in C or C++. Signal to Noise test equipment (smaller programming projects) to voice and data switches with major companies.

That is okay though, I expect that your small world had grand ideas and never brought a product to market... failure is always an option ya know.

Really, DON’T pretend you know what the hell is going on in this world, you are a small part of it, as I am (very small from a programming point), and you really need to realize that. You pretend to understand things that you do not, but that is okay as long as you don’t push it, but really, get a grip!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.