Linux security

Daniel Carrera daniel.carrera at
Fri Apr 28 23:50:34 UTC 2006

Stephen R Laniel wrote:
> You seem to be looking for a guarantee. You're not going to
> get one.

Your whole email was good except for this line. How many times do I have 
to say that I'm not looking for a guarantee before people will listen? I 
said it right on the first email I sent, first paragraph. I spent a 
whole pagragraph saying that the question is not "is Linux inmune to 
viruses?" but "is Linux inhospitable to viruses?". I said that again 
twice afterwards. This is the FOURTH time I have to say this. How 
difficult is it for people to understand this? It's not a difficult 
concept you know? I'm fully darn well aware that there isn't a piece of 
conde on this side of the galaxy that is completely inmune to security 
threats. There is no security system that can't be broken. The objective 
of security is to raise the bar. To make it more difficult for security 
breaches to occur and to minimize the damange when they do. And that is 
what I've been seeking out here. Geez!

    /\/_/   ...and starting today, all passwords must contain
    \/_/    letters, numbers, doodles, sign language and
    /       squirrel noises.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list