Linux versus Microsoft - US-Bulletin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Heinz Kringler
  • Start date Start date
H

Heinz Kringler

Die Zeitschrift "Chip" in ihrer aktuellen Ausgabe (03/2006) auf
Seite 25, oben:

ZITAT-ANFANG:
"Sicherheitsbericht: Linux unsicherer als Windows
Das Cyber Security Bulletin 2005 des US-Heimschutzministeriums
weist für Linux fast dreimal so viele Lücken auf wie für
Windows. Konkret: 2.328 Linux-Bugs stehen gegen 812 im
Microsoft-OS. Allerdings sagt das nichts darüber aus, wie
kritisch die gefundenen Lücken sind.
Den ausführlichen Bericht finden Sie über den Link unten.

info: www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB2005.html
ZITAT-ENDE


Und nun?
 
Heinz Kringler said:
Die Zeitschrift "Chip" in ihrer aktuellen Ausgabe (03/2006) auf
Seite 25, oben:

ZITAT-ANFANG:
"Sicherheitsbericht: Linux unsicherer als Windows
Das Cyber Security Bulletin 2005 des US-Heimschutzministeriums
weist für Linux fast dreimal so viele Lücken auf wie für
Windows. Konkret: 2.328 Linux-Bugs stehen gegen 812 im
Microsoft-OS. Allerdings sagt das nichts darüber aus, wie
kritisch die gefundenen Lücken sind.
Den ausführlichen Bericht finden Sie über den Link unten.

info: www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB2005.html
ZITAT-ENDE
Click to expand...
Jahre = 2005 ??
 
Heinz Kringler laid this down on his screen :
Die Zeitschrift "Chip" in ihrer aktuellen Ausgabe (03/2006) auf
Seite 25, oben:

ZITAT-ANFANG:
"Sicherheitsbericht: Linux unsicherer als Windows
Das Cyber Security Bulletin 2005 des US-Heimschutzministeriums
weist für Linux fast dreimal so viele Lücken auf wie für
Windows. Konkret: 2.328 Linux-Bugs stehen gegen 812 im
Microsoft-OS. Allerdings sagt das nichts darüber aus, wie
kritisch die gefundenen Lücken sind.
Den ausführlichen Bericht finden Sie über den Link unten.

info: www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB2005.html
ZITAT-ENDE


Und nun?
Click to expand...

schreiben Sie es auf englisch bitte
 
Heinz Kringler laid this down on his screen :

schreiben Sie es auf englisch bitte
Click to expand...


PS: The URL will have english words for some evenings, I think.
Don´t you?
 
On 06 Feb 2006, Heinz Kringler wrote
Die Zeitschrift "Chip" in ihrer aktuellen Ausgabe (03/2006) auf
Seite 25, oben:

ZITAT-ANFANG:
"Sicherheitsbericht: Linux unsicherer als Windows
Das Cyber Security Bulletin 2005 des US-Heimschutzministeriums
weist für Linux fast dreimal so viele Lücken auf wie für
Windows. Konkret: 2.328 Linux-Bugs stehen gegen 812 im
Microsoft-OS. Allerdings sagt das nichts darüber aus, wie
kritisch die gefundenen Lücken sind.
Den ausführlichen Bericht finden Sie über den Link unten.

info: www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB2005.html
ZITAT-ENDE
Click to expand...

I'm not a partisan on this -- Windows-based user, but I've dabbled
in Linux without having an epiphany on either -- but a quick glance
at the lists seem to indicate that there could be a fair amount of
double-counting some of the Linux ones. (Particularly in Multiple
Vendors -- is it a case of "same problem, different vendor = 2
incidents?)

I could delve deeper into it, of course, but I'm not *that*
interested in the subject -- all operating systems suck; they just
suck in different ways...
 
I could delve deeper into it, of course, but I'm not *that*
interested in the subject -- all operating systems suck; they just
suck in different ways...
Click to expand...


That´s a true word. I see its the reality by often times....
 
Heinz Kringler laid this down on his screen :
I can´t understand your answer, Sir!
Click to expand...

Really? I wonder why you can't understand it---it's written in the same
language as the original post...
 
Heinz Kringler has brought this to us :
PS: The URL will have english words for some evenings, I think.
Don´t you?
Click to expand...

And if you had used the link to surf to the site, you would've seen a
couple of thousand links to choose from. So which one(s) is/are the
original message asking us to notice?

All I asked was for the poster to rewrite the original message in
English---maybe even use the same online-translator that I use when I
post on newsgroups that are predominately used by French, Dutch,
Italian and German.

It's a courtesy to write in English when most of the people on the
newsgroup are writing in English---writing in English is not a sin.

"schreiben Sie es auf englisch bitte" means "Please write it in
English"---It was a cordial and polite request and that request is not
unreasonable.
 
Heinz said:
Die Zeitschrift "Chip" in ihrer aktuellen Ausgabe (03/2006) auf
Seite 25, oben:

ZITAT-ANFANG:
"Sicherheitsbericht: Linux unsicherer als Windows
Das Cyber Security Bulletin 2005 des US-Heimschutzministeriums
weist für Linux fast dreimal so viele Lücken auf wie für
Windows. Konkret: 2.328 Linux-Bugs stehen gegen 812 im
Microsoft-OS. Allerdings sagt das nichts darüber aus, wie
kritisch die gefundenen Lücken sind.
Den ausführlichen Bericht finden Sie über den Link unten.

info: www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB2005.html
ZITAT-ENDE


Und nun?
Click to expand...


Wos jetz'?


Des is eh logisch. Des Linux kann net weniger Sicherheitslück´n hab´n
als des Windows. Wer soll´n de Sicherheitsmaßnahmen programmiern?

Des Windows kost´ halt was, dafir kriagst a ane Leistungen.




I think with serious fine-tuning of Linux, it is possible to protect
from any attacker. 50:50 :-) (Although the percentage may vary
depending to the force and will of the attacker. Fifty-fifty,
preconditioned the Attacker is on the same expert-level as the Defender)





Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Daniel Mandic
 
Harvey said:
I could delve deeper into it, of course, but I'm not that
interested in the subject -- all operating systems suck; they just
suck in different ways...
Click to expand...


Me also not.
But it is interesting :-)

I don?t think Linux can change something.





Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic
 
killall Daniel Mandic:
I think with serious fine-tuning of Linux, it is possible to protect
from any attacker. 50:50 :-) (Although the percentage may vary
depending to the force and will of the attacker. Fifty-fifty,
preconditioned the Attacker is on the same expert-level as the Defender)
Click to expand...


IMHO, any OS is secure if configured correctly.
(NO OS is secure "out of the box").
This is something that most, if not all Linux weenies forget when
talking about "Micro$lut Windoze" (sic).

And, given enough time, a way to hack WILL be found.
--
[]s, Renan "Wishmaster" - Canoas, RS, Brasil

"De Berkeley vieram UNIX e LSD.
Eu não acho que isso seja uma coincidência."
(ambos são drogas e podem arruinar sua vida)
 
Renan wrote:

Killall... are you mad, or what?
IMHO, any OS is secure if configured correctly.
(NO OS is secure "out of the box").
This is something that most, if not all Linux weenies forget when
talking about "Micro$lut Windoze" (sic).
Click to expand...

Only one way. Only by download.
And, given enough time, a way to hack WILL be found.
Click to expand...

Would have been found.




Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic
 
killall Daniel Mandic:


IMHO, any OS is secure if configured correctly.
Click to expand...

Disagree. An OS can have a flaw which makes configuration irrelevant.
Or an OS can dictate your correction of a flaw when they get around to
it. Insufficient information from them to do it yourself.
(NO OS is secure "out of the box").
This is something that most, if not all Linux weenies forget when
talking about "Micro$lut Windoze" (sic).
Click to expand...

With linux "out of the box", the "weenies" will always have a look.
Can't say the same for anything out of Redmond.

BTW, your sig is also very wrong.
"De Berkeley vieram UNIX e LSD.
Click to expand...

Neither UNIX nor LSD came from Berkeley.
Eu não acho que isso seja uma coincidência."
Click to expand...

Try Bell Labs and Switzerland.
ambos são drogas e podem arruinar sua vida)
Click to expand...
And, given enough time, a way to hack WILL be found.
Click to expand...

I'd rather rely on the "weenies".
 
Harvey said:
On 06 Feb 2006, Heinz Kringler wrote
Die Zeitschrift "Chip" in ihrer aktuellen Ausgabe (03/2006) auf
Seite 25, oben:

ZITAT-ANFANG: [...]
info: www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB2005.html
ZITAT-ENDE
Click to expand...

I'm not a partisan on this -- Windows-based user, but I've dabbled
in Linux without having an epiphany on either -- but a quick glance
at the lists seem to indicate that there could be a fair amount of
double-counting some of the Linux ones. (Particularly in Multiple
Vendors -- is it a case of "same problem, different vendor = 2
incidents?)

I could delve deeper into it, of course, but I'm not *that*
interested in the subject -- all operating systems suck; they just
suck in different ways...
Click to expand...

The Firefox counter is even worse.
 
Renan said:
SELECT * FROM alt.comp.freeware WHERE AUTHOR = Dewey Edwards:



BSD is a form of UNIX; the B stands for Berkeley, AIUI.
Click to expand...
Yes, but BSD UNIX was a derivative of Bell Labs UNIX Version 7, IIRC.
So yes, _BSD_ UNIX came from Berserkeley, but _UNIX_ came from Bell, or,
later, AT&T.

UNIX version timeline: <http://www.levenez.com/unix/>

Cheers,
Gary B-)
 
Back
Top