Windows More Secure Than Linux? Yep!

[Warren Togami]

Oh darn.  These guys look like experts too.  Time to throw in the towel.

http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=23958
WinInfo Short Takes: Week of February 4

Windows More Secure Than Linux? Yep!
Thanks to David Byrne for this tip: For at least the first 8 months of
2001, open-source poster child Linux was far less secure than Windows,
according to the reputable NTBugTraq, which is hosted by SecurityFocus, the
leading provider of security information about the Internet. (The company's
2001 statistics are available only through August 2001 for the time being.)
According to NTBugTraq, Windows 2000 Server had less than half as many
security vulnerabilities as Linux during the reported period. When you
break the numbers down by Linux distribution, Win2K had fewer
vulnerabilities than RedHat Linux 7.0 or MandrakeSoft Mandrake Linux 7.2,
and it tied with UNIX-leader Sun Microsystems Solaris 8.0 and 7.0. A look
at the previous 5 years--for which the data is more complete--also shows
that each year, Win2K and Windows NT had far fewer security vulnerabilities
than Linux, despite the fact that Windows is deployed on a far wider basis
than any version of Linux. So once again, folks, you have to ask
yourselves: Is Windows really less secure than Linux? Or is this one of
those incredible perception issues? For more information and the complete
stats, visit the SecurityFocus Web site. I'll check back on this story to
see how all of 2001 shapes up.