Security

[Thrillhouse]

Remember security starts with you not the software.

That's an interesting position. I would argue that security starts with the software, not you. Yes, the user is under some obligation to apply patches and whatnot but to make them responsible for someone else's flaws is...well...flawed, IMO.

[Jonathan183]

Get back to me if SuSE or Ubuntu or any other major general purpose distros utilize these features by default.

Take a look here ... best is down to opinion and opinions vary

While I like the RedHat product and variations I'm not going to say they are the best security wise. Remember security starts with you not the software.

That's an interesting position. I would argue that security starts with the software, not you. Yes, the user is under some obligation ...

I think most features can probably be effectively defeated by poor user practices - software can help but not cure the problem.

Maybe I misunderstood but looking back at the OP this was a best security package question ... short answer there is not one but review link posted by ozar

[Lazydog]

That's an interesting position. I would argue that security starts with the software, not you. Yes, the user is under some obligation to apply patches and whatnot but to make them responsible for someone else's flaws is...well...flawed, IMO.

What I am saying is that everyone is responsible for their own security. Software can only do so much and you have to be aware of this. Thus Security begins with you not the software.

[nopycckn]

People are definitely responsible for their security. This operating system being more secure inherently than that operating system, OpenBSD being so secure, etc. The fact that they are or aren't secure to begin with is a given, what you do with them makes them either insecure or secure. If everyone starts making horrible security software, that's one thing ... If everyone makes great security software, your system will be still be wide open if you do the wrong thing. Besides, not everyone's going to start making horrible software all at once, so it's still up to you to choose your software wisely at worst. Just don't use security software you find somewhere because it's got a nice logo.

[Thrillhouse]

Well, that whole line of thinking is flawed in my opinion. The fact that we need "security products" to remedy "security failures" says a lot about where the problem lies.

[Jonathan183]

Well, that whole line of thinking is flawed in my opinion. The fact that we need "security products" to remedy "security failures" says a lot about where the problem lies.

I'd consider something like rkhunter a security product, but I also think the failure is user rather than software based. I run ClamAV to scan things every so often ... but I think I'm protecting against user rather than software failures in this case also - running Linux I don't expect many viruses to affect the system but don't want to pass anything on to Windows users (even though they are likely to have sent them to me without knowing).

[Lazydog]

As long as there is software there will always be a flaw somewhere. There really isn't any getting around this, so the next best thing is awareness. And that is how we come to Security starts with you.