[Bush2000]

Microsoft products get cracked more often than their competitors' because they're easier to crack, not due to popularity.

Actually, you're full of crap. Your sacred cows get hacked just as frequently (if not more so) as Windows:
Windows More Secure Than Linux? Yep!

[dheretic]

HAHAHAHAHAHA. You expect Wininfo.com to be objective? Come on pal. That's like trying to get the average slashdotter to not verbally impale MS on a long rusty nail. If the hole isn't in the kernel or a kernel module, it isn't a "linux security hole." Linux is just a kernel, everything is maintained by separate teams. Blaming the kernel team for a hole in OpenSSH would be like blaming Microsoft for a hole in AOL's software. Linux distributions are just that, distributions. They're complete packages of the kernel plus programs compiled for the linux kernel as opposed to the FreeBSD kernel. They aren't pure operating systems in the sense you think of Windows or MacOS. Nice attempt at trolling, too bad it didn't work.

[dheretic]

Oh and you might want to take a look at their source

some juicy tidbits for you: holes for 2001: slackware: 10, debian: 28, NT4/2k: 42.

Redhat installs a lot of stuff by default for convenience. The RedHat approach is to setup a fully operational box of some kind and then make the user set the configuration properly. If you cannot take responsibility for locking down a system to your specifications, WTF are you doing be a sysadmin of any kind in the first place?!

Debian and Slackware are very conservative distributions. Debian's debug and analysis cycle is longer than some of Microsoft's entire development cycles. Hence it beats NT4/2k.

So, you were saying? :)