Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/johnband/sbbs.johnband.org/index.php:1) in /home/johnband/sbbs.johnband.org/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Consultants on crack http://sbbs.johnband.org/2004/08/consultants-on-crack/ As fair-minded and non-partisan as Torquemada. Wed, 07 Mar 2012 07:16:20 +0000 hourly 1 By: Chris Lightfoot http://sbbs.johnband.org/2004/08/consultants-on-crack/#comment-318 Tue, 17 Aug 2004 12:29:00 +0000 http://sbbs.johnband.org/?p=328#comment-318 The usual scam with these "Linux less secure than Windows" reports is to count all of the security holes found in the Linux kernel and all the software in a typical distribution (thousands of packages, usually), and then compare this to the number of security holes found in Windows and the Windows shell (which is basically just Internet explorer). If this still doesn’t give the answer you want — and remember, Windows has a lot of security holes — you then count the security holes in Linux once for each distribution (so that a single kernel bug counts as, say, four security holes — one in each of Red Hat, Debian, Suse and Mandrake).

Basically this is a pretty transparent scam and one has to wonder why they’d bother with something so openly dishonest. Ah well….

]]> By: Simon J http://sbbs.johnband.org/2004/08/consultants-on-crack/#comment-316 Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:58:00 +0000 http://sbbs.johnband.org/?p=328#comment-316 The main sysadmin here at work seriously belives Linux is less secure than Windows, *because* linux is open source. We develop on Linux for Linux and email/word process etc on Windows.

]]>