To: ShadowAce
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
3 posted on
10/31/2008 11:19:48 AM PDT by
Mr. K
(Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
OpenBSD is inherently more secure than any major Linux distro.
4 posted on
10/31/2008 11:24:12 AM PDT by
CE2949BB
(I voted.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
By default, on Vista, the user runs as a limited user account, and can be elevated to administrator whenever a program requests it and the user replies Allow to the prompt. Much safer, although this system (UAC) seems to annoy Windows users to the point where they turn it off (effectively running as administrator non-stop) or learn to click Allow automatically as I mentioned in the last bullet point. Windows software tends to be written with the assumption that the user is running as administrator, just as they did in Windows XP, and this fires so many UAC prompts that it becomes annoying. This isnt Microsofts fault, its the fault of Windows-based software developers for trying to do the kinds of insecure things that require administrator access.The problem with Microsoft trying to shoehorn a security model on their insecure API is that the "Allow" buttons pop up far too often for things that are not very hazardous, like an instant messaging client accessing the internet. What Microsoft should have done is have the installer handle permissions instead of implementing an annoying runtime popup.
The best thing Linux has going for it as far as virus avoidance is concerned is the package repositories. Instead of downloading from a random website (or running a file received in an email), everything executed is from a widely tested trusted source. Apple has a similar system implemented with their iPhone as well.
5 posted on
10/31/2008 11:30:01 AM PDT by
dan1123
(If you want to find a person's true religion, ask them what makes them a "good person".)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
yes, but I hate X windows even more than I hate Windows.
6 posted on
10/31/2008 11:34:03 AM PDT by
cetarist
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The security of an operating system is in direct proportion of it’s popularity....the more popular the more time more people will spend hacking/writing malicious code to exploit it..... PEROID. Vulnerabilities exist in all code due to the nature of grey areas in the standards that have been established to afford interoperability of software and systems....The key to security isn’t the false notion of invincibility, it’s in maintaining a secure environment and reducing risk.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The Internet runs on Linux. Anything critical runs on AIX. ;-)
Microsoft sucks!
Been running Linux since the earliest versions of Slackware.
To: rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; Salo; Bobsat; JosephW; ...
14 posted on
10/31/2008 12:01:29 PM PDT by
ShadowAce
(Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Apples (no pun) shouldn't be compared to oranges.
Anybody who globally states "Windows sucks" or "Linux sucks" doesn't know enough about computers to comment.
And if you want security, go with SOLARIS and forget those silly linux distros.
21 posted on
10/31/2008 1:01:51 PM PDT by
gilor
(Pull the wool over your own eyes!)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
33 posted on
10/31/2008 2:41:40 PM PDT by
rdb3
(Get out the putter. This one's on the green.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson