At 11:38 PM 5/7/01 -0400, Chuck Larrieu wrote: >Check out http://www.attrition.org/mirror/attrition/ > >Interesting to read the history files. It would appear that nearly half of >compromised servers are NOT Wintels. Which says a lot about the security of >ALL operating systems. > >Chuck Without looking at the site, I would say most are from Linux and Solaris boxes from a default install. A unix box is far more dangerous in the hands of a mediocre admin as opposed to a windows box in the hands of a newbie. CAVEAT EMPTOR! -Carroll Kong Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=3549&t=3362 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IOS [7:... Jason
- Re: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Jacques Atlas
- Re: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Jacques Atlas
- RE: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Chuck Larrieu
- Re: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Control Program
- Re: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Allen May
- Re: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Jason Roysdon
- RE: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Chuck Larrieu
- RE: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Christopher Kolp
- Re: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Carroll Kong
- Re: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Carroll Kong
- Re: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Jason Roysdon
- RE: linux on a 2500 ? Was: Programming under IO... Priscilla Oppenheimer

