Re: Re: hello

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 15:01, Ashley Sheridan <ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote: > On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 10:10 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote: >> Linux is just as susceptible to >> viruses, worms, and other malware > I'd beg to differ. While it may be susceptible, I think it is far less > so, just because of the security it has from the off. And also, the type > of people who tend to use Linux do often tend to be more technical who > are less prone to certain methods of virus attack. Correct --- which comes down to the operator and the potential the software offers, not the software itself. If a user leaves everything as its default setting, vulnerabilities and exploits will be found, which reclassifies a "secure" system as an "insecure" system. *NIX systems can be patched and re-patched.... but changing nothing, keeping it as it original was off the shelf (as was the broad-scope case with Windows until recently) creates an equality in insecurity. -- </Daniel P. Brown> daniel.brown@parasane.net || danbrown@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!