|
I really do not see that as an accurate report. The problem I have is that most if not all the patches for windows are patching flaws of critical system software (software you can not remove and cause security issues). The number of security issues with Linux distros are skewed because they are based off of pre-installed software packages (Red Hat is the worst distro to base this report off because it includes sooo much). Other than the kernel and a command line interpreter for Linux, you don't need anything else. So now instead of talking about hundreds if not thousands of applications that may have flaws (none related to the core operation of the operating system), we're now talking about really 2 applications.
Now of course everyone is going to say "well if all you have is a kernel and command line you won't be using the internet which causes all the insecurity from remote hack attempts". Ok, so add internet support, put in FTP, SSH, and an e-mail server. There's some insecurities there... BUT WAIT!!! There's more then one of each you can choose so which one do you base the security report on? The most popular by download? Nope, can't do that because a lot of people download to try and quiet often never use. The most popular? Well how do you gauge that?
I won't sit here all night typing up a response to that security report but it is severely skewed and based off the wrong information. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go back to enjoying my Linux desktop that has been running for a year and a half without a reboot, running a DNS, e-mail and web server, 10's of thousands of hack attempts, and not one breech. Later!
|
