Nice FUD. But then, majority of vulnerabilities from BOTH systems come from software components and not the kernel itself (We run both Server 2003 and Linux servers at work). Security vulnerability alerts must always be read with outmost care and attention and not just accepted for its face value.
Jerome On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 00:34:15 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Another Microsoft funded research.. > > A report released today indicates Windows Server 2003 may actually be more > secure than its most popular Linux competitor when it comes to vulnerabilities > and the time it takes to patch them. > > http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid14_gci1069985,00.html?track=NL-105&ad=509123 > -- Cheers! Jerome Gotangco Ubuntu Local Community (LoCo) Philippine Team http://www.ubuntulinux.org/wiki/PhilippineTeam Lok'tar Ogar! http://loktarogar.blogspot.com -- Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List plug@lists.q-linux.com (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph . To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug . Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie
