anton wrote:
Zane Gilmore wrote:
Brad Beveridge wrote:
"The group discounted the recent wave of worms, viruses and other attacks that have affected Windows systems worldwide. It confined the study to overt digital attacks by hackers."
Hmm, so they don't worry about the big stuff.... Since I don't run windows, neither do I :) Statistics can be made to say anything, 48% of people know that.
95% of all statistics are made up on the spot :-)
I tried to read the exact paper they were quoting for this article but to read it you need to pay approx $100 !
This looks a bit like a Netcraft "make up a survey that we can make Linux look bad" style of thing. But this one looks like it has an interesting twist by putting a $100 "door fee" you can keep out the "riff-raff" so that it can't be properly discredited.
Found this article, the results are interesting...?
This could be a bad thing for Linux in general though couldn't it?
What will be more likely is that mi2g will be discredited.
The name mi2g says it all...I checked out their website, after they started claiming about linux security being lax...they do not offer linux services, yet they do Windows and Mac server stuff. The info they have comes from 2nd hand reports from 'experts' that cannot be validated, so its nothing but FUD generated by pencil pushers trying to gain Win/Mac network security contracts...
-- Kind regards,
Chris Wilkinson, Christchurch, New Zealand.
