- To: "Rick Welykochy" <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Compromised Linux box stories (Re: [SLUG] upgrading complicated installs)
- From: "Sam Gentle" <sgentle@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 10:53:42 +1000
- Cc: SLUG list <slug@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Sridhar Dhanapalan <sridhar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=BxbnJVstjqN9rsHMPbYyKThX/ZaV7RxdHvodxD01e+U=; b=A7hv8NxSOQTpYlf9tfSrNcxNMhDRAFLpaSWtyS9UFQ/PHXXXRS8P9gjH161wbm06cgCaHOLemTFVY41xUb0osUKg1HFQc0lRLnlAnBfvKCPkGSTV1G+/y+ZFIrEwkUKN65VIl/vXzbd53utpPkJinR0E1hsT5L6Mf8dTVGPlldA=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=CX+9HG+0e37yDB6iEDNSg6cAKHBzaSHp3qurH0YxkWMe8rVYNI/mSWBXRzw4YhhIVpFq6dc7G2IqOsQ6vuiZZwtmcOgrfT9Q9A+RIzlJlNjIBvHgB4uG+u4wUluYh7uMcalEsxHuTsh8L61xKHty/wys6ZT0SF1BwuA3BGEaKZA=
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Rick Welykochy <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 at 14:59, Jason Ball <jason@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not wishing to start an OS war, but I rarely if ever have seen a BSD
>>>> or Sun box compromised. Is this due to sheer numbers of Linux and
>>>> Doze?
>>>
>>> More than likely.
>>
>> I've seen a range of plausible reasons and hard statistics to back up
>> Linux supporters' assertions that the frequency of compromises on Windows
>> systems is due to far more than just its sheer install base.
>>
>> I'd hate to see Linux users start to solely use the 'market share'
>> argument against other, less used, operating systems.
>
> As pointed out previously, one contributing factor to x86 Windows
> and Linux architectures being popular targets is that there is
> significant payback in writing attack software for platforms that
> are ubiquitous. The rarer the system, the less likely there is
> blackhat experience to crack it.
>
> Market share is a factor. But as we all know, a house of cards
> built of shakey foundations is another factor.
>
> BSD and Sun zealots do claim that their software systems are much
> more robust/stable than Linux and Windows. I cannot respond to
> that claim.
>
>
> Regarding your sig:
>
> Your toaster doesn't crash. Your television doesn't crash.
> Why should your computer? http://www.linux.org.au/linux
>
> The answer should be obvious. A dedicated computer running an
> appliance runs heavily tested software dedicated to one purpose
> and a well-known hardware set.
>
> A general purpose computer running any variety of software you
> install along with a conglomerate of possibly never before tried
> hardware suffers the combinatorial explosion of interactions and
> complexity that a toaster never experiences.
>
> The devil is in the detail of general-purpose vs purpose-built.
That said, I know a great knife-related toaster bug. For some reason
instead of fixing it the designers just added warnings to the user
manual saying "don't use this combination of inputs".
Sam
SLUG Mailing List Archives