begin  quoting Lan Barnes as of Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 12:09:34PM -0800:
[snip]
> I accept the premise that badly configured Linux boxes will increase in
> number with popularity. I would expect a badly configured Linux box to
> be intrinsically more secure than a badly configured windoze box, but
> maybe not as secure as a well-configured winzode box.

Linux is getting better -- I don't think that the common distributions
ship a wide-open box anymore, with all services running.  I would expect
that over time, "badly configured" default installations on all systems
would be thinned out.

My biggest concern isn't really the default configuration -- it's the
user community.  A user community that demands all the bells and 
whistles will be hard to train to accept a locked-down system by
default.  "Badly configured" may be what the user community *demands*.

> These discussions get touched off regularly by various on-line articles
> from Forbes to Slashdot, and AFAICT, more than half of the articles have
> a bias. Having a bias doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong, but as
> we've all seen in M$-funded white papers, sometimes it means you're
> using statistics to lie and spread FUD.
 
In any good FUD, there's a grain of truth; attempts to dismiss the FUD
will be self-discrediting unless handled /very/ carefully.  Blanket
dismissals may backfire among the uncertain, and *will* backfire among
the convinced.

> We have real security people on this list (I am not one of them), and
> I've noticed that none of them has ever recommended switching to
> windoze. Sure, it's a Linux list so there is self-selection, but this is
> an opportunity for them to weigh in, so ... Phil? Tracy? Anybody? Is it
> time to switch to windoze? Zone-H says Linux is the most attacked OS.

Well, if you're *really* worried about security, you might want to
switch _away_ from Linux[1].  That doesn't mean that you'd want to switch
*to* any sort of Redmondware -- there are more than just two players 
in the game, after all -- but there are several other alternatives.
I hear good things about BSD, for example.

Plus, if the volume of attacks bother you, you should also switch your
hardware to something less common; this means that random attackers
are less likely to have tools that would run on your system, should they
*succeed* in breaching your defenses.  SPARC is still a bit common, and
PPC as well, although both are less common than x86; ARM might be a
reasonable choice for the paranoid.

[1] Or to SELinux, if you want to take up the administrative burden.

-Stewart "Monocultures suck. In software, in hardware, in attitude." Stremler
-- 

KPLUG-List mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to