Linux not secure?

[mesut]

read the article below,

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/top_n...fm?NewsID=7980

i did not believe it, but please post your comments about it.

[fingal]

It might be true if there is a lack of training on these systems. I doubt that Linux is secure by default! I'd like to look at their research findings, though, and see how they arrived at their conclusions. Also, what was their research methodology? Have they published any of this and what evidence do they have that we can examine?

[andutt]

Linux can be very secure but its up to the adminsitrator, it can be very useful target if its wrongfully configured and have server applications installed on it...then it can be a very useful tool for a hacker.

Much more people is also using linux so its quite normal that linux have more attacks.

People must be better to configure thier systems....thats the bottom line.

[mesut]

the research was made by mi2g, Detailed information can be found here
http://www.mi2g.com/cgi/mi2g/media.php

[Opnosforatou]

It's also claimed that Linux has become the most breached online server OS in the government and non-government spheres for the first time, while the number of successful hacker attacks against Windows-based servers have fallen for the last ten months.

Sponsored by M$ ??? like the other company stating M$ windows runs faster than Linux..

I agree on the part of Mac OS. It's stable and secure.

Wow the report : SIPS Monthly Report, Full Report, January 2004; can be ordered for : £881.25 (including taxes)

[variant]

The group discounted the recent wave of worms, viruses and other attacks that have affected Windows systems worldwide. It confined the study to overt digital attacks by hackers.

that kind of makes the entire "study" useless as, if hackers basically cant gain acsess to linux machines with viruses etc then they can only do it by other means (direct exploits of THIRD PARTY APPLICATIONS) as the study focused on government machines then i think it safe to assume that these 3rd party aplications were made by those governments and are certainly not open source. with windows it is so open to viruses that there is no need to go through the dificulty of directly hacking the system. I sugest that the study be redone with the factor of viruses included.. then i think you would see linux back on top

[fingal]

I am very sceptical about a report which costs so much money. It makes me suspect that here we have a group of consultants trying to whip up a bit of fear and paranoia in order to cash in. That's how a lot of these groups work... Get you nice and worried, then move in with some 'expertise' to help 'sort things out'.

[mad_hatter]

Mi2G is a cagey outfit anyway. Just check out what the attrition website has to say about them.

http://www.attrition.org/errata/char...g-history.html

Cheers.

[RootLinux]

LMAO
Take he worm and virus out of the picture. HAHA
I love it.
So how many hacks via worm and virus attacks happened to Windows or Linux servers?

Digital hacks?
That is the most bogus bunch of crap.
How can the discount worms and virus in a REAL security study?