Author Topic: Windows XP More Secure than Linux  (Read 17222 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mastertech

  • Guest
Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« on: January 17, 2007, 06:05:29 AM »
Windows XP More Secure than Linux

Windows XP -170 Advisories = 213 Vulnerabilities.
Linux Kernel v2.6.x - 108 Advisories = 231 Vulnerabilities.

 :o

Offline Marc57

  • Avast Evangelist
  • Super Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 1944
  • KISS Rules The World!!!
    • KISS Army
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2007, 07:29:43 AM »
That's good to know, Thanks Mastertech.
You Wanted the Best You Got the Best the Hottest Band in the World KISS!!!

Offline OrangeCrate

  • Avast Evangelist
  • Advanced Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 798
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #2 on: January 17, 2007, 02:37:22 PM »
Mastertech,

If your post was just a ploy to get us to see the picture on the site, it worked.

Thanks, you made my day!

 :)

Mastertech

  • Guest
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #3 on: January 17, 2007, 02:49:13 PM »
Your welcome but it was for the security info. ;)

Offline bob3160

  • Avast √úberevangelist
  • Probably Bot
  • *****
  • Posts: 48697
  • 64 Years of Happiness
    • bob3160 Protecting Yourself, Your Computer and, Your Identity
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2007, 03:41:17 PM »
Since I use Linux strictly from a Ubuntu bootable CD, I highly
doubt that I'm more at risk when using Linux than when using XP.  ;D

In any event, my system of choice is XP and browser of choice is IE7.  :)
Free Security Seminar: https://bit.ly/bobg2023  -  Important: http://www.organdonor.gov/ -- My Web Site: http://bob3160.strikingly.com/ - Win 11 Pro v24H2 64bit, 32 Gig Ram, 1TB SSD, Avast Free 24.4.6112, How to Successfully Install Avast http://goo.gl/VLXdeRepair & Clean Install https://goo.gl/t7aJGq -- My Online Activity https://bit.ly/BobGInternet

kubecj

  • Guest
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2007, 03:45:43 PM »
I wrote it last time (before I nuked both mastertech-infected threads): It's just some randomly selected numbers and Mastertech's interpretation of them is plain wrong. Same song again.  ::)

Offline Lisandro

  • Avast team
  • Certainly Bot
  • *
  • Posts: 67194
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #6 on: January 17, 2007, 03:47:32 PM »
Same song again.  ::)
Kubec, why don't you just close the thread?  ::)
The best things in life are free.

Offline OrangeCrate

  • Avast Evangelist
  • Advanced Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 798
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #7 on: January 17, 2007, 03:56:33 PM »
This is an article on Ubuntu security specifically, and Linux in general. It also compares the XP security model to Ubuntu. It is authored by "Aysiu" who is on the Ubuntu forum staff.

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/security

An interesting read, and a realistic take on Linux security issues.

kubecj

  • Guest
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #8 on: January 17, 2007, 04:25:26 PM »
Same song again.  ::)
Kubec, why don't you just close the thread?  ::)

<sarcasm>
Maybe because some folks from the land of the free would have (again) objections and would like to teach us apes what is a freedom of speech?   ::)
</sarcasm>

Offline OrangeCrate

  • Avast Evangelist
  • Advanced Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 798
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #9 on: January 17, 2007, 04:41:54 PM »
Quote
<sarcasm>
Maybe because some folks from the land of the free would have (again) objections and would like to teach us apes what is a freedom of speech?   ::)
</sarcasm>

Without the "land of the free", your market would be pretty small. Is this what you really want to post on your forum?

If you've got a problem with Mastertech, address it, otherwise watch your mouth.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2007, 04:45:06 PM by kubecj »

kubecj

  • Guest
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #10 on: January 17, 2007, 04:46:39 PM »
Don't know if it's my pidgin or what, but I wrote about 'some folks from...', ie. not general objection to USA folks.

neal62

  • Guest
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #11 on: January 17, 2007, 05:42:59 PM »
I've got another idea. It seems that anytime Mastertech posts it causes problems. Moderators then after a period of time delete his posts and any responses made to them. Moderators, why not just ban him from the forum if it's causing problems that you don't want to see???

Mastertech

  • Guest
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #12 on: January 17, 2007, 06:48:05 PM »
It's just some randomly selected numbers
Looks like the number of vulnerabilities for the latest version of the Linux kernel vs the number of vulnerabilities for Windows XP. Hardly random, and I didn't interpret anything, I posted it directly from the source site (popular technology). If you click on the links these are all of the vulnerabilities since each was released. Interesting how just the latest version of the Linux Kernel has more vulnerabilities than Windows XP in the last five years.

Why are certain people afraid of this information? This is supposed to be a security related site yet all security related information that exposes anything certain people don't like is deleted?

kubecj

  • Guest
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #13 on: January 17, 2007, 07:01:26 PM »
You _DID_ interpret it. See the subject. The number of reported vulnerabilities or reports has no direct connection to the security.

I may just make any statement like this - for example "This vulnerability makes impact on 4353 various Linux distributions whereas this vulnerability makes impact only on one Windows version". <g>

Mastertech

  • Guest
Re: Windows XP More Secure than Linux
« Reply #14 on: January 17, 2007, 07:12:59 PM »
The subject is the same as the source.

Wait so the number of security vulnerabilities is not related to security? ::)

Or are you saying the number of Linux Kernel v2.6.x vulnerabilities are not related to the security of all the distributions that use this Kernel? ::)

Or are you trying to use the ridiculous number of Linux distributions as some sort of excuse for not relating them to the vulnerabilities in the Kernel?

It sounds like you are making excuses for something very obvious.