Find the answer to your Linux question:
Results 1 to 5 of 5
i have heard lot abaut *bsd security and linux. generaly *bsd is more secure and stable then linux mostly becaus of its kernel. why dont guys that develop kernel make ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8

    linux security


    i have heard lot abaut *bsd security and linux. generaly *bsd is more secure and stable then linux mostly becaus of its kernel. why dont guys that develop kernel make so secure kernel like *bsd's kernel. is linux kernel realy so unsecure as they say or not? how can i make linux system secure and stable as fbsd?...

  2. #2
    Linux Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    514
    What did you hear that makes the Linux kernel less secure?

    My system runs SELinux (available for many distros), which is a kernel extension implementing Mandatory Access Controls developed by the NSA which probably helps with the security.

  3. #3
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    323
    The topic has been discussed many times over the years in various bulletin boards. It is worthwhile distinguishing between "secure" and "securability". The BSD family may not be very secure out of the box, it is by reputation highly securable quite easily. The same may be true for Linux; a good measure is counting the number of security advisories per month for an OS and make your decision on that basis.

    Tech

  4. #4
    Linux Guru anomie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,692
    The BSD family may not be very secure out of the box, it is by reputation highly securable quite easily.
    I don't know of anything that is really secure out of the box, but FreeBSD is getting close.

    The point about "secure" and "securable" is well taken, though, and for a real expert Linux (and even Windows) can be made highly secure.

    The same may be true for Linux; a good measure is counting the number of security advisories per month for an OS and make your decision on that basis.
    Or maybe counting the number of "critical" security advisories? If Linux puts out 1,000 advisories, two of which are critical, and Windows puts out 50 advisories, 45 of which are critical, I think I will feel more comfortable with 998 that aren't going to result in my system being compromised. (And I'll patch the other two.)

  5. #5
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    323
    Anomie

    You have point there:
    Or maybe counting the number of "critical" security advisories? If Linux puts out 1,000 advisories, two of which are critical, and Windows puts out 50 advisories, 45 of which are critical, [...]
    Better not to tread there, all manner of legal conundra will come your way when trying to agree on a counting method. The most authorative source is still CERT (www.cert.org), but even that is ocassionally contested.

    Best


    Tech

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •