![]() |
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Forums | Portal | Register | Forum Rules | FAQ | Contribute | Members List | Arcade | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| What's on Your Mind? Come inside and relax a while. Maybe play a few Video Arcade Games if you have free time. |
| View Poll Results: What is safest? | |||
| Linux (all flavors and distros) |
|
5 | 41.67% |
| BSD (all types) |
|
7 | 58.33% |
| Unix (like AIX, Solaris,...) |
|
7 | 58.33% |
| Mac |
|
2 | 16.67% |
| M$ (all after ME, but not including 2000) |
|
0 | 0% |
| Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 12. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Streamlined Firefox 3 makes browsing safer, more productive | iBot | UNIX and Linux RSS News | 0 | 06-20-2008 12:00 PM |
| Nuclear Elephant iPhone Wipe making your iPhone Safer for Resale | sparcguy | What's on Your Mind? | 0 | 06-11-2008 10:42 PM |
|
|
Submit Tools | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is M$ safer than UN*X(-LIKE)??
I know that you already know the answer to the question. It just springed in my mind after what happened yesterday. I was getting some books off of Amazon.com, since they are cheeper than bookstore, and my mother said something that made me laugh 'till I couldn't breathe. I have a Debian Lenny box while my parents have an XP box. My mom still doesn't understand the difference so she thinks that because I don't have antivirus or antispyware like she does, that my box is less safe
P.S. She also told me that that Norton 360 was safer than Linux. Any ADMIN can delete this if they believe that it breaks any UNIX.com rules. |
| Forum Sponsor | ||
|
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
There's malware out there for mac and linux. Don't get too cocky there
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
In my last job we had a Solaris based ftp server. It had a Microsoft virus infected file that was distributed to dozens of our clients' pc's before we caught it. Our clients complained our ftp server was infected. Were they right? In any event, we started runnning a virus scanner. That virus scanner would have caught the infected file.
So depending on your home network and what interactions can occur among your home systems, I might agree with your Mom. Just because you're immune doesn't mean that you should not care if you bring infected files into your home. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
In your case Per, its the file that was infected. I wouldn't say that your Solaris server was infected, but it did act as a host/carrier.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
The argument could be made that it was infected. Even in medical terms an a host or asymptomic carrier is defined as being infected but not suffering the symptoms of infection; that seems like an appropriate description, the host suffers no ill effects but can transmit the disease.
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well the virus scanner on a server is a definiate since probably 70% of your clients are going to have a M$ Windows box, and most viruses are Windows aimed. I am going to add stuff to my computer like virus protection, but I already had IPtables setup via FireStarter at the time. But the orginal statement was saying that, as I have found, the average Windows user doesn't know the difference between Windows virus and PC virus and believe that all viruses and malware in Windows works on almost any PC.
For example, I called an Internet Service Provider, I won't say who though, and asked them if their internet security that they offer through their internet connection only protected Windows PC's or does it cover other OS such as UNIX or UNIX-like and the response I received was: Don't those viruses affect all computers? Not bashing windows users, but people just need to understand the difference between PC viruses and Windows viruses and Linux viruses, etc... |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hm, could all of us refer to Microsoft as MS instead of M$? I mean everyone is in the OS business to make money...
|
||||
| Google The UNIX and Linux Forums |