[luau] Counterpoint: Linux vs. Windows Viruses

[Michael_Bishop/FARRINCS/HIDOE at notes.k12.hi.us]

An interesting article. Comes down to the same old point/counterpoint...
Windows or Linux, it doesn't matter, a system is only secure as long as the
SysAdmin or user keeps it patched and a vigilant eye on usual occurrences.
Security doesn't come in a bottle or as a magic program, it is the user or
admin that must keep up to date with computer security.

I think LTSP makes good sense in this day when SysAdmins are being pushed
to do more with less (time, money, etc). I'd rather keep a good eye on a
few servers that service most of the campus. Rather then almost no eye on
50, 100 or 200 computers around campus. No to mention keeping them patched,
up to date and have to deal with the occasional screwed up machine that
will take away many hours of time to reload that I don't have.

A quote from the end, "To sum it all up, both Windows and Linux desktop
systems face the same security threats, same lack of updates and the same
presence of end-users wanting to see the latest Maria Sharapova pictures
and hear the latest Viking Kittens MP3. Any initial advantages in security
that Linux desktops may have through a different design are quickly
outweighed by the sheer complexity in maintaining that design. It is
striking to see that the user/attack ratio is so much higher on Linux, and
unless the large distributions improve and simplify their desktops in key
areas I doubt we will see much of a secure desktop market on Linux.

As Scott Granneman puts it, security is not a product, but a process."

Michael


Just thought I'd let you all know, Thor Larholm has written an excellent
counterpoint article to the Linux vs. Windows Viruses column.  You can
read it here:

http://www.securityfocus.com/guest/23028

Marc Fossi
Symantec Corp.
www.symantec.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------