Once again, I'm slow on replying to things...
Arsenic wrote:
> (here comes my rant) I think part of my problem when it comes to things
> like this is that the people who make/use Linux don't seem to be very
> vocal about security. Maybe I'm wrong about that but every time I ask
> someone a security question, I get an answer like "Don't worry about it,
> Linux is safer than Windows".
>
> This makes me nervous. At least when you use Windows you know what
> you're getting yourself into. There's bucketloads of documentation and
> a whole host of expensive (and not so expensive) software to help you
> stay secure. It's not that I've ever had a problem in Linux (I wonder
> if I would even know if I *did* have a problem) but a combination of not
> having taken what seems like *enough* security measures and not being
> entirely comfortable with the OS (not knowing where things are, not
> knowing how to fix things when they break) leaves me constantly on edge.
> I know that I've had security problems in Windows but I only know about
> it because of the wonderful people at Symantec.
>
> I worry, when it seems like the only thing standing between my machine
> and the rest of the world is me. I don't know if that makes any sense
> but there it is. As an old Windoze user who needs lots of reassurance
> to feel comfortable, I would kill for a Linux 'System Works' and Linux
> 'Internet Security'. I guess the high configurability of Linux and all
> the different flavours might make it hard to develop such software.
There was a response to this which was "Google it", but for those who
want just a quick synopsis of why Linux is more secure, here's how I see it:
1) In-kernel firewall. It's robust and has been improved over many
years. It's an inherent part of Linux, not just an add-on.
2) Non-administrative users. Sure, you can run as a non-administrative
user in Windows, but it's a pain in the ass. Some programs will
actually tell you that they won't work properly unless you've got
administrative privleges. Most people run it that way. That means when
a virus runs while you're logged in, it has access to the whole system.
Linux is much more properly set up to do this right. When you run a
virus under a normal user in Linux, all it has access to is the stuff
that that user has access to, which isn't much.
3) Open source. There are a lot more people out there that are trying
to fix security bugs than are trying to exploit them. When you have the
code out there for everyone to see, the problems can be found and the
fixes can be deployed well before they're ever exploited. All the
algorithms used in common encryption techiques are open source. Think
about it.
4) Software updates. Most distros will aggregate the software updates
of all the software that they offer. This means that every time you
update your Linux box, all your software is being patched for the latest
security updates. With a Windows machine, you have to chase those
patches down from all your software vendors. Microsoft won't do that
for you. Again, you could do it yourself, but chances are that it's too
much effort, or you have to pay for those upgrades.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. I hope you feel more at ease about
the security in Linux.
Chad Martin
To unsubscribe from this list, please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] & you will be
removed.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LINUX_Newbies/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
