To be honest for a while I was looking for a similar answer until
I stumbled across some well written articles on this exact question.
The answer is in two parts.
1. Unix/Linux community doesn't promote bad social computer engineering
so as to sell more software, ie a user would just click on anything like
in windows and infect their whole machine and have the default user
running in such an open environment, that he/she can trash the whole
system install and/or lay waste to the INTERNET with spam.
2. Windows promotes heavily a "mono-culture" when it comes to software,
so a virus writer often just needs to create a virus for one application
they are pretty much guaranteed to infect 90% of Windows users ( can
anyone say "outlook"). Where with Unix/Linux they promote lots of
different variations of applications with varying degree's of features
for the same job.. Just ask what MTA you use when a group of Linux users
get together and chances are you will get a plethora of answers, some
using a plethora of MTA's too, you know who you are. :-)
The nearest single analogy I can come across that explains Linux
security is Linux is based on an "evolutionary" development platform
were the fittest and most diverse survive. Were windows has a forced
evolutionary development based on what sells software. As anyone who has
studied evolutionary science can attest the more diverse and random your
genetic makeup, the higher the probability of survival in the natural
ever on going virus arms race.
Hope this helps
GPLG
GPLGPLGP
GPLGPLGPLGP
GPLGP
GPL MICROSOFT
GPLGP
GPLGPLGPLGP
GPLGPLGPL
GPLGPL
Richard Neal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 17:24, Bill Bennett wrote:
> It's a peculiar request, so please bear with me.
>
> I had been asked why Linux was immune to the wave of viruses
> that have been pillaging Microsoft-oriented machines. To be
> honest, I didn't have a ready reply. The best I could do was
> "Well, Linux is differently organised." Feeble, I know, but the
> enquirer was not a nurd and, if it comes to that, neither am I.
>
> So I thought about the matter. I wanted a good analogy.
>
> This was the best that came to mind:
>
> "Assume someone has put something in your petrol that rots
> piston heads and only piston heads. Eventually the engine
> will fail.
>
> *However* it's not going to affect me if my engine is a Wenkel."
>
> As I say, the best I could do.
>
> Can anyone do better? The issue *must* have surfaced in the past
> and valid analogies must have been drawn for the non-technical.
> My reason for wanting this is that, occasionally I'm asked why I
> will not even look at, or consider going back to MS. Blinding
> people with technicalia generally gets you nowhere.
>
> Bill Bennett.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
