Is this really true ....CHIP published a story that windows with all
patches and licensed from the M$ was 100% safer than pirated windows
and Linux varities . Now another article on this Linux VS windows
issue . What do you feel about this ?


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Bharath Ganesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 13:43:58 +0530
Subject: Study finds Windows more secure than Linux
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 
Study finds Windows more secure than Linux 
 

By Brier Dudley 

Seattle Times technology reporter 
 

  

SAN FRANCISCO â Believe it or not, a Windows Web server is more secure
than a similarly set-up Linux server, according to a study presented
yesterday by two Florida researchers.

The researchers, appearing at the RSA Conference of computer-security
professionals, discussed the findings in an event, "Security Showdown:
Windows vs. Linux." One of them, a Linux fan, runs an open-source
server at home; the other is a Microsoft enthusiast. They wanted to
cut through the near-religious arguments about which system is better
from a security standpoint.

"I actually was wrong. The results are very surprising, and there are
going to be some people who are skeptical," said Richard Ford, a
computer-science professor at the Florida Institute of Technology who
favors Linux.

Their research could contribute to the debate about which system costs
more for companies to operate. Linux costs less to acquire, but
Microsoft is trying to convince buyers that its software is less
expensive to run and manage.

The researchers said security management is a key factor in the cost
of running any system. "We need a real factual comparison here," said
Herbert Thompson, the other researcher. He is director of security
research and training at Security Innovation, a company that provides
security services and technology. "There's so much speculation on the
Web, newsgroups, from certain presenters on an RSA stage, we need real
solid facts."

They compared Windows Server 2003 and Red Hat Enterprise Server 3
running databases, scripting engines and Web servers (Microsoft's on
one, the open source Apache on the other).

Their criteria included the number of reported vulnerabilities and
their severity, as well as the number of patches issued and days of
risk â the period from when a vulnerability is first reported to when
a patch is issued.

On average, the Windows setup had just over 30 days of risk versus 71
days for the Red Hat setup, their study found.

"That's a very surprising statistic, and I must say the first time I
saw this statistic I thought you messed with my database," Ford said
to Thompson. Their presentation started jokingly, with Ford reeling
off Windows jabs and praising the virtues of freely shared software
that's developed collaboratively over the Internet.

But they concluded with statistics showing that the Windows setup had
a clear advantage over the Linux alternative.
 
 
 

 
 

 

 

The setups were hypothetical, however. Both were in the most basic
configuration, an approach that some in the audience suggested may
tilt the results in favor of Windows, which comes with more features.

Ford said the idea was to represent what an average system
administrator may do, as opposed to a "wizard" who could take extra
steps to provide plenty of security on a Linux setup, for instance.

The presentation was a preview of a report they plan to issue in 30 days. 

The future of ID: Authenticating the identity of computer users is a
big topic at the conference, but Microsoft's Passport authentication
system was missing in action.

Chairman Bill Gates stressed the importance of authentication and
authorization technologies during his keynote address Tuesday but
didn't mention Passport. Instead he pitched the capability of
Microsoft servers that help network administrators manage digital
identities.

A serious challenge to Passport was unveiled separately by RSA
Security, the Bedford, Mass., company hosting the conference.

The company, which runs America Online's authentication system,
announced it's making its SecurID program for consumers available in
the third quarter.

A key feature is a device that saves users from having to create or
remember secure passwords. The system uses a key fob that plugs into a
computer USB port and generates a new password each time a user logs
in. To authenticate themselves during an online session, users enter
the serial number on the back of the device and the password or code
that appears on a small LCD display.

RSA did not provide pricing information. But in demonstrating the
system by logging in to a fictional online bank, the company's slides
showed an annual fee of $9.95 a year.

The system is being tested now by E-Trade, Yahoo! and Sony Online
Entertainment.

Check the checks: Credit-card companies are doing an effective job
cracking down on fraud. But there are plenty of ways for identity
thieves to steal from you, Gartner researcher Avivah Litan said.

Particularly at risk are the checking-account transaction systems.
Litan said they haven't been targeted as much in the past so their
security systems lag behind those of credit-card processors.

One step that banks are taking is to strengthen authentication
methods. Litan predicted that by the end of 2007, around three-fourths
of banks around the world will use something other than passwords.

"Passwords really don't cut it anymore," she said during an RSA media
luncheon, which paved the way for RSA to announced its SecurID system.

On the government front: Government regulation of cyberspace may be
needed to protect the nation's critical infrastructure, said Richard
Clarke, former U.S. counterterrorism coordinator.

Clarke and Jamie Gorelick, a former deputy attorney general and a
member of the 9-11 commission, appeared at RSA and called for action
on anti-terrorism recommendations such as a national intelligence
director.

They said government and private industry should do more together to
secure the network infrastructure from a future attack. Clarke equated
such an attack with other surprises the nation received in the last
century â the Pearl Harbor attack and Sputnik â as well as the Sept.
11 attack.

"It shouldn't happen twice in one generation, and on the issue of
cybersecurity we are forewarned," he said.

 
 ________________________________
 Yahoo! Groups Links
 
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tamilchamps/
  
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 
 

-- 
********************************************
B.Bharat Shetty
7th semester CS&E
SJCE , Mysore
http://geocities.com/b_bharat_shetty/
********************************************

Reply via email to