??? 11/16/07 15:33 Read: times |
#147075 - Yes, it is Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Erik Malund said:
... how much does it help getting a patch after you have been hit? You assume all Linux users will be hit within that narrow time frame. "Statistics: A branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of masses of numerical data." Learn something about it. I tell my students to think of it as "Self Defense 101". If you knew anything about the subject, you'd realize why. Example: I say that I never receive any spam. Technically that's not quite true. There is a narrow window of a few milliseconds between my software examining the headers and then downloading emails not identified as spam. Because of that, I've received two (count 'em--two) spams this year. Two. In a year. Whoopie. Windows users I know get up to a hundred per day. Secondly, any damage done by a virus in Linux will be small compared to what Windows viruses do. Unless the user is a clueless newbie who runs as root. PS does "discovery of a vulnerability" not disprove your statement about Linux being secure? Think before you speak. It disproves nothing about what I said. Neither I nor anyone else ever claimed that Linux, or any OS, is perfect. Just that it's orders of magnitude superior to swiss-cheese, defective by design Windows. And once again, Erik: I'm not trying to convert anyone. If you like using a broken OS, then by all means do so. Just do the rest of the world a favor and don't connect it to the internet. Do your work with Windows, but surf the net and do email with a system that won't become a spambot, or worse. Doesn't have to be Linux. Mac OSX works fine, as do several other OSs. And please don't give me the tired old argument that you have a firewall and anti-virus software. If you use Windows on the internet, you will be owned eventually. It's just a matter of time. If I had a dollar for every Windows user who is sure that his/her system is not infected... |
Topic | Author | Date |
Says it better than I can | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re 'evangelism' | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
So limited | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I believe it's obvious | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
If YOU would read what I posted | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Wine and VirtualBox | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
and you suggest that for DEVELOPMENT??? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Don't know about Linux but love your D52.EXE | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Why ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
What makes Linux less vunerable? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Design | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
that's great, but ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes, it is | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Huh? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: Huh? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Linux vs Windows | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
What sort of Linux do you have, Craig? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Oh yea ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
True | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Looks like... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Security | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
AMEN! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Everybody should use linux! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Linux attacks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Not Targets | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Caveat Emptor | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
email vulnerability | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Kleinstein | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Linux is the "solution" ... for now ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Concur | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Layers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Perhaps | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Separation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
If Linux was an airline | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Keep reading | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Bad logic | 01/01/70 00:00 |