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