Windows 7

[PicassoCT]

Micro$oft.

they do it for delicious cake - whats wrong with it?

[aegis]

linux and macs are more susceptible to tampering because they do not have the years and years of hardcore security testing that MS has painfully learned from.

If all virus makers and hackers to to today turn their sights on mac and linux (in this example, ubuntu) and the user being an average know nothing computer user (like a grandmother using windows), I think that mac and linux would crumple much faster than a vista/win7 machine would. Of course that is highly debatable, however, linux in particular does not have all the "common" safeguards that windows machines have. No OS is unhackable, no piece of software is unhackable, that is simply a fact of the game.

have you ever hardened a linux system? played with linux security more than idly? do you have ANY idea what you're talking about?

[Neddie]

I can tell you from my peripheral experiences in penetration testing that it is much, much more difficult to get into a maintained Linux box than a Windows box. Any scriptkiddy can drop your M$ with Metasploit.

[Forboding Angel]

linux and macs are more susceptible to tampering because they do not have the years and years of hardcore security testing that MS has painfully learned from.

If all virus makers and hackers to to today turn their sights on mac and linux (in this example, ubuntu) and the user being an average know nothing computer user (like a grandmother using windows), I think that mac and linux would crumple much faster than a vista/win7 machine would. Of course that is highly debatable, however, linux in particular does not have all the "common" safeguards that windows machines have. No OS is unhackable, no piece of software is unhackable, that is simply a fact of the game.

have you ever hardened a linux system? played with linux security more than idly? do you have ANY idea what you're talking about?

We aren't talking about hardened here are we? We are talking for the most part off the shelf installs. For windows that also happens to include a virus and spyware checker (as they are an ingrained thing), for linux, it's just an install of the distro.

Your grandmother doesn't know how to harden a linux system any more than she does a windows system, so talking about how hardened something could be is totally irrelevant in this instance.

Edit: Wait a sec... did you just claim that linux is unhackable? That's a bit bold isn't it?

[lurker]

Windows has a really bad non-resident scanner. Linux needs one? You normally only install via the package manager.

[Neddie]

He didn't claim it was unhackable, he didn't even address that point of your argument, Forb.

[Gertkane]

He didn't claim it was unhackable, he didn't even address that point of your argument, Forb.

I am a bit confused, but what part did he address then?

EDIT: Not to look like i am just trolling. To a some extent, i put linux's security advantage to the fact that pretty much everyone who uses linuxes on a daily basis are all very familiar with computers. On the other edge of the scale we have the majority of windows users, who are really more or less retarded when it comes to computers. That, coupled with the fact that the amount of malicious software development vs linux is nothing compared to the amount of effort being put globally vs MS products, is why i think none of us can really know what would happen if the roles were reversed and why i think none of us should tear at each others throats.

[Neddie]

If all virus makers and hackers to to today turn their sights on mac and linux (in this example, ubuntu) and the user being an average know nothing computer user (like a grandmother using windows), I think that mac and linux would crumple much faster than a vista/win7 machine would. Of course that is highly debatable, however, linux in particular does not have all the "common" safeguards that windows machines have.

[aegis]

We aren't talking about hardened here are we? We are talking for the most part off the shelf installs. For windows that also happens to include a virus and spyware checker (as they are an ingrained thing), for linux, it's just an install of the distro.

Your grandmother doesn't know how to harden a linux system any more than she does a windows system, so talking about how hardened something could be is totally irrelevant in this instance.

Edit: Wait a sec... did you just claim that linux is unhackable? That's a bit bold isn't it?

you'll be happy to know ubuntu comes off-the-shelf with security hardening, then.

[Gertkane]

I thought that whole paragraph was one argument (the unhackable being just an unimportant non-debatable addition), oh well, carry on.