Lisi Reisz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] asked: [...] > > That's because Linux only has a very small segment of the market. If > Linux > > gains a larger market share, then the idiots that write viruses will > begin > > to write viruses for Linux. > > So how come there are so few viruses that attack Unix based servers and so > many that attack Windows based servers, although Unix and its descendants > are > in the majority and Windows servers in the minority? Could it just be > that > the OSs are intrinsically more secure?
On the server side? Not so much. But Linux and Unix installations always tend to start out with secure defaults and assumptions that you have to deliberately, knowingly set to less-secure modes. Windows server versions (at least in earlier editions) tended to leave a lot of things too open by default, but a diligent admin could still make 'em as secure as a Unix server doing the same job. It's a tradeoff. Many of the convenient things that Windows users like, and that they can't get on Linux/Unix, require opening potential vulnerabilities (think of Active Directory, .Net, etc.). But if you configured two boxes to serve only the kinds of stuff (and only in the ways) that are available on Linux/Unix, then you could make the Windows box equally secure. So far, Windows Server 2008 (formerly Longhorn) looks a bit more secure and conservative out-of-the-box than previous Windows server versions. With that said, I'd still choose Linux unless forced to use Windows. :-) Cheers, Kevin The information contained in this electronic mail transmission may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer without copying or disclosing it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
