> > tone, I have to reboot my Linux server several times per day (I assume
> > because of hackers), and my Windows NT server has been rebooted for
>
> Then you evidently don't know how to set up and run a Linux server because
> otherwise
> 1) It would be patched, up to date and hardened against hackers
> 2) You would KNOW (not assume) if it was hackers because you would have a
> feel for "normal" on your server.

That is correct. And I cannot justify spending the thousands of dollars for
somebody who can, nor the (presumably) thousands of hours learning. I have
been using them about the same amount of time (since about 1992 or so). So,
I go with an operating system that is easier and more intuitive to
administer.

>
> > hardware and software upgrades only. It currently has been up for three
> > years, three months and 5 days. (November 12, 1999 when we moved our
> > offices)
>
> So you havent applied any patches etc for 3 YEARS????

That is correct.

>
> > The only reason that Microsoft products are the target of so much malice
> > is because they are the most commonly used products. People are not
> > going to write a virus that targets non-Microsoft email clients for
> > basically two reasons:
> >
> > 1. There is not as much bang-for-the-buck. (Why write a virus to take
> > down three computers, when, for the same amount of effort, you can take
> > down three million?)
> > 2. They do not wish to publicly declare that their software of choice is
> > just as vulnerable.
>
> B**lshit!  The are a few worms around for *nix systems and virtually nil
> viruses as it is not as easy to exploit as a Windows box.  Pure and
> simple.  Nothing to do with how many are out there...

Sure...

>
> Windows is generally speaking (thinking mostly home users here) wide open
> permissions and running email clients that have scripting built-in.

Not too many with wide-open permissions... but you are correct about email
clients with built-in scripting.

>
> Also because the GUIs are so prevalent any old person can setup servers
> without having a foggiest idea on what they are actually doing or what
> they need to do to secure it!
>
> > But, although I would never rely on *nix for my desktop workstation, I
> > wouldn't run Windows on my Internet Servers either.
>
> I use Linux and Windows interchangeably on my workstations depending on my
> mood and what I am trying to do.
> I would NEVER use Windows for an Internet server.

I can't 'do' virtually anything in Linux. Even simple text editing takes
rocket science.

>
> But any system with a competant admin that keeps it up to date with the
> security patches and upgrades can be very secure.  The problem is most
> people dont...

And with *nix, we would have to hire a full-time admin.

Reply via email to