Linux security

Daniel Carrera daniel.carrera at zmsl.com
Fri Apr 28 21:26:10 UTC 2006


albi wrote:
> well, your question is an impossible question
> 
> no OS can garantee that no user-files will be harmed while using the
> "evil" internet

No no no. Please read what I wrote again. I'm not looking for an 
absolute guarantee. The question is: IS IT BETTER?

Saying "no OS is perfect" completely misses the point. The question is, 
does Linux actually offer any increased protection for the most common 
and damaging type of viral attack? If so, how?

I don't want to concede Microsoft's argument that Linux only has fewer 
viruses because it's less popular. People say that Linux is inherently 
more secure. Well, is it really? What does it have to make virus attacks 
more difficult? Notice, once again, I didn't say "impossible", I didn't 
say "invulnerable", I said "more difficult". Does Linux actually do 
anything to make the most common and damaging virus attack more difficult?

Daniel.
-- 
      /\/`) http://opendocumentfellowship.org
     /\/_/
    /\/_/   ...and starting today, all passwords must contain
    \/_/    letters, numbers, doodles, sign language and
    /       squirrel noises.





More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list