Re: Windows vulnerability vs Linux vulnerability [Re: Would a firewall

From: The Ghost In The Machine (ewill_at_aurigae.athghost7038suus.net)
Date: 05/07/04


Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 20:00:05 GMT

In comp.lang.java.advocacy, Luke Tulkas
<Luke_Tulkas_88@hotmail.com>
 wrote
on Fri, 7 May 2004 09:55:50 +0200
<2g0to6F36c7pU1@uni-berlin.de>:
>
> "Richard H Miller" <rick@bcm.tmc.edu> wrote in message
> news:c7ebq3$9o2@gazette.corp.bcm.tmc.edu...
>> Lassi =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hippel=E4inen?= (lahippel@ieee.orgies.invalid)
> wrote:
>> : Leythos wrote:
>> : >... Once the Nix systems
>> : > and apps hit the desktop with as many installs as Windows you'll
>> : > see weekly exploits about them too.
>>
>> : Not likely. Unix has been hacked (and attacked) many years longer
>> : than Windows. And Unix architecture is far better than Windows, in
>> : the sense that software modules can be isolated from each other.
>>
>> : -- Lassi
>>
>> This is not correct
>>
>> 1) If you are talking about the kernels of the two systems, the NT OS
>> has a more secure design.
>
> a) Is there such a thing as a kernel in Windoze? (I asked the same
> question some time ago and didn't get any relevant answers.)

Yes, although I for one would have to find it.

> b) When you say NT OS, do you mean just the NT or it's successors (2000,
> 2003, whatever) also?
>

Probably all three.

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.


Relevant Pages