The real point to me is that problems are not adequately measured by a binary metric, "have problems/don't have problems":
"Every operating system and every Web server application has had security holes, and they will have them in the future." Sure, both Sweden and Afghanistan "have problems". That doesn't make them equally desirable as places to live. E On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, punk wrote: > > well said. i'd agree completely, except for i think that if you can get > solaris started and apache installed at all you will be operating at a > more secure level than is possible with IIS. So, on the one hand, the > chances of getting it up and running in the same amount of time as the ms > stuff is indeed slim, but since it is impossible to secure IIS, you have > an infinitely larger chance of being able to secure solaris, since at > least it's possible to do. > > (there may be some very slight exageration there. very. slight.) > > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Sach Jobb wrote: > > > This is yet another article written by someone that is, and always has > > been an M$ user and has NO experience using *nix in any sort of a > > practical or production manor at all. > > > > I know this from the 4th paragraph, which looks like it's the first > > supporting argument after Mr. Mullen's thesis. > > > > <snip> > > Not that IIS hasn't had its share of issues; it certainly has. But so has > > everything else out there. Every operating system and every Web server > > application has had security holes, and they will have them in the > > future. > > </snip> > > > > Now if memory serves me right: > > > > Remote root exploits in apache since it's creation: 1 (1.2.x, remember?) > > Remote root exploits in IIS in the last year: 3? 4? > > > > Number of virus targeted at apache since it's creation: 0 > > Number of virus targeted at IIS sine it's creation: n > > > > > > > 'One thing is for sure: If you've got an admin that can't secure a > > > Microsoft Web server, then your chances of having them secure a Solaris > > > installation will be slim.' > > > > Okay, no one is going to disagree with this, but if you want a secure > > system there is a lot more to it then just the admin. The key point being > > that if it's open source system, YOU CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. If you are > > using M$, the best you can do is pray for a quick patch that won't break > > things even more than the virus did. It's out of your control. > > > > Remember service pack 2, NT 4.0? It was the hotfix for the horrible errors > > they made in service pack 1, but they broke even more than the fixed. > > > > What's the quote from "Ghost World"? "It was so bad, that it was funny > > again, and then it wasn't." > > > > Cheers, > > sach > > > > > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Lorin wrote: > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22132.html > > > > > > Critical to gartner groups advisory to switch away from M$ products. I'm > > > not sure i agree with most of his points about how it doesn't matter that > > > much which system you use, but the argument towards the end was > > > interesting: > > > > > > 'One thing is for sure: If you've got an admin that can't secure a > > > Microsoft Web server, then your chances of having them secure a Solaris > > > installation will be slim.' > > > > > > -Lkb > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > /* > > Sach Jobb > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > %s/windows/linux/g > > */ > > > > "As far as i'm concerned the two biggest hassles in the world revolve > > around DNS and girlfriends." > > > > -- (name undisclosed to protect the innocent) > > > > > > > > > > -_== > > "It's nothing personal, but the world will tear you down > and pull you under." - R. Crumb > > -- Erik Curiel Sometime Web Engineer/Almost Philosopher "O, little rose-tree, bloom! Summer is nearly over. The dahlias bleed, The phlox is seed, Nothing is left of the clover. And the path of the poppy no one knows--- I would blossom if I were a rose." ---Edna St. Vincent Millay "Three Songs from 'The Lamp and the Bell'"
