Security with Linux - Newbie

[R. Mattes]

Chuck Vose wrote:

>>Even if you don't get something upgraded right away it's safer than
>>Windows, none of this "twenty minutes without a firewall and you're
>>infected" situation as can happen in Windows.
>>    
>>
<grin> I wouldn't take that for granted. As a SysAdmin with servers in 
several
locations i can watch new exploits migrate through the net - at 
impressive speed.
It doesn't take very long for a knowm vulnerability to be used in a 
worm/scripted
attack.

>By default of course. This is why there are all the warnings about the
>root account (and why Ubuntu ships without a disabled root account for
>that matter.) The problem with the innvincibilty idea is that Linux is
>just as vulnerable when someone who doesn't know what they're doing
>gets behind the keyboard. In reality I would say that Linux is more
>vulnerable since Windows doesn't let you do stupid things where Linux
>will honestly let you do whatever you want if you're logged in as
>root.
>  
>

Hmm, i sencond your statement about "Linux" becoming  more vulnerable 
because
of the amount of unskilled people starting to use it (sadly). BUT i 
strongly object
that 'Windows doesn't let you do stupid things' :-) As a matter of fact 
it makes it pretty
easy to do stupid things and makes it damned hard to avoid them (running 
services, open
SQL DBMS without the user even knowing that MSSQL is even installed 
etc.). A lot of MS users
run with adminsitrative privileges all  the time.

 cheers RalfD

>-Chuck
>
>  
>