On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 09:40:33AM +0530, Kiran K Karthikeyan wrote: > Isn't the lack of mainstream use the main reason Apple and Linux don't see > as many attacks? Therefore, if all of Google were on Apple and Linux, I > guess there is enough reason for a hacker to build up his skills on those > OSes?
There's number of attacks, and there's intrinsic vulnerability. OS X is pretty vulnerable, Linux less so, and *BSD even less. Then you must differentiate by desktop vs. server, and whether the systems are well-kept, hardened or stock, etc. In general, Google's decision makes sense. > Besides, the attacks originating from China were on their servers I would > guess, not individual employees' machines. These I thought were on Google's IIRC it was individual desktops which got compromised first. > proprietary technology. Or were they running Windows server? :) -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
