Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Bush2000
I predict that the security issue will actually become less prominent over the next 5 years, as vendors on both sides adopt better strategies to address worms, trojans

I think so too. From what I've read of XP SP2, MS is rewriting its entire RPC system to slow the tide of vulnerabilities based on the current system's atrocious bounds checking. SP2 will contain a chunk of the rewrite. Maybe then they'll finally be able to go a month without a security update -- December was supposed to be the first month they did that but they had a couple anyway.

Practically nobody on your side talks about stability anymore.

They've made some great strides on the desktop. My XP system only freaks out once or twice a week with normal use, which is much better than 98 or 2000. But with servers, Windows still can't touch Linux or BSD for continuous uptime.

There's nothing wrong with the design of Windows

To begin with, there are the DLLs which cause conflict and require reboots after updates (say hello to downtime). Then there's the lack of the Unix equivalent of the separation of Administrator and Root so if you want to do anything, you're running with more privileges than you need. Then you have various installers that turn on services previously turned off.

If Linux users were to run as administrator and execute unsafe code, they would be infected with the same worms, viruses, and trojans.

You've forgotten already? Linux users often run as administrator, but still aren't vulnerable to many exploits. This is because administrator in Linux doesn't have the total system control that administrator in Windows does. This is one of the architectural flaws in Windows.

56 posted on 01/11/2004 2:20:58 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: antiRepublicrat
But with servers, Windows still can't touch Linux or BSD for continuous uptime.

As long as you cover your eyes and forget about the last two critical Linux kernel vulnerabilities.

To begin with, there are the DLLs which cause conflict and require reboots after updates (say hello to downtime).

Actually, these don't require a reboot. The DLLs can actually be renamed and replaced. The fact that the installer asks you to reboot is really a bug in the installer.

Then there's the lack of the Unix equivalent of the separation of Administrator and Root so if you want to do anything, you're running with more privileges than you need. Then you have various installers that turn on services previously turned off.

Wrong. You can create Windows users with arbitrarily complex masks of capabilities -- which provides the same functionality.
64 posted on 01/11/2004 2:56:39 PM PST by Bush2000 (tro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson