Re: Which Router for VPN and Webhosting

From: Eirik Seim (eirik_at_mi.uib.no)
Date: 09/20/03 

Date: 20 Sep 2003 13:50:23 GMT

On 20 Sep 2003 05:47:28 -0700, BC wrote:
> Lars M. Hansen <badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote in message news:<f6dnmvc9elb9ghsumi3qe80886s600u1un@4ax.com>...
> > On 19 Sep 2003 18:09:43 -0700, BC spoketh
> >
> > >
> > >Sorry, but that's a ridiculous statement. Extremely ridiculous.
> > >So ridiculous that I think I should contact someone at American
> > >Heritage Dictionaries and ask him/her to consider using this as
> > >an example for "ridiculous," as in:
> > >
> >
> > Ok, so we know you are able to spell "ridiculous", but why don't you try
> > to substantiate your claim that Linux is more secure than Windows...

I'll throw in some comments as well.

Less bloat. According to Schneier[1], there are an average of five
to 15 bugs in every thousand lines of code. In his book, "Secrets
and Lies"[2], he estimates Windows 2000 to consist of somewhere
between 35 and 60 million lines of code.

Less security auditing. Linux is Open Source, which mean all of the
source code is completely open for everyone to see. In contrast,
no one outside Microsofts programming team has seen their source
code[2, page 210]. This argument has lost some effect as Microsoft
currently agree to let some (notably governments) see their code,
but it's still not open for everyone to see. And it most likely
never will be.

This leads me to believe that _open source_ is in general more
secure than _closed source_, and in particular: Small[3] open
source products are more secure then big (bloated) closed source
products.

- Eirik

1. http://dir.salon.com/tech/review/2000/08/31/schneier/index.html
    (page two)
2. ISBN: 0-471-25311-1
3. As in, less bloat than "big" 

-- 
New and exciting signature!
Loading