Re: Re: hello
| From: | Ashley Sheridan | Date: | Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:59:44 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: hello | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-285762@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 22:38 +0000, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Skip Evans wrote:
> > Nathan Rixham wrote:
> >>>
> >> yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the
> >> next; no
> >> one OS is more insecure than any other
> >>
> >
> > Wrong, and there is experimental data to prove it. Read the first URL
> > I posted that documents the creation of Linux viruses and the
> > experiments conducted to see how they propagate compared to Windows
> > viruses.
> >
> >
> think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0
> vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's
> have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because
> they are all insecure.
>
> the only way to change the balance is to make or find an OS with 0
> vunerabilities; thus making it secure and no longer equal.
>
> my worlds boolean.
>
That's like saying a nuke is as bad as a bullet; they can either kill or
not kill. It's not a black and white issue. You really need to look at
the potential vulnerabilities, and then compare patch frequencies. I
think you'll find Windows is less secure.
Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk