Nu ben ik zelf een niet Linux gebruiker dus ik oordeel niet maar ik wil wel eens de mening horen van mensen die wel de afweging kunnen maken.
MOST UNSECURE OS? YEP, IT'S LINUX.
According to a new Aberdeen Group report, open-source solution Linux
has surpassed Windows as the most vulnerable OS, contrary to the
high-profile press Microsoft's security woes receive. Furthermore, the
Aberdeen Group reports that more than 50 percent of all security
advisories that CERT issued in the first 10 months of 2002 were for
Linux and other open-source software solutions. The report muddles the
argument that proprietary software such as Windows is inherently less
secure than open solutions. And here's another blow to the status quo:
Proprietary UNIX solutions were responsible for just as many security
advisories as Linux in the same time period. Could Windows be the most
secure mainstream OS available today?
"Open-source software, commonly used in many versions of Linux, UNIX,
and network routing equipment, is now the major source of elevated
security vulnerabilities for IT buyers," the report reads. "Security
advisories for open-source and Linux software accounted for 16 out of
the 29 security advisories--about one of every two advisories--published
for the first 10 months of 2002. During this same time, vulnerabilities
affecting Microsoft products numbered seven, or about one in four of all
advisories."
The stunning report makes several claims that seem to fly in the face of
widely accepted beliefs. First, the Aberdeen Group says that
Windows-based Trojan horse attacks peaked in 2001, when CERT released
six such advisories, then bottomed out this year, when CERT didn't issue
any alerts. However, Trojan horse-based attacks on Linux, UNIX, and
open-source projects jumped from one in 2001 to two in 2002. The
Aberdeen Group says this information proves that Linux and UNIX are just
as prone to Trojan horse attacks as any other OS, despite press reports
to the contrary, and that Mac OS X, which is based on UNIX, is also
vulnerable to such attacks. Even more troubling, perhaps, is the use of
open-source software in routers, Web servers, firewalls, and other
Internet-connected solutions. The Aberdeen Group says that this
situation sets up these devices and software products to be "infectious
carriers" that intruders can easily usurp.
According to the Aberdeen Group, the open-source community's claim that
it can fix security vulnerabilities more quickly than proprietary
developers can means little. The group says that the open-source
software and hardware solutions need more rigorous security testing
before they're released to customers. This statement is particularly
problematic because many Linux distributions lack the sophisticated
automatic-update technologies modern Windows versions contain.
We can rail against Microsoft and its security policies, but far more
people and systems use Microsoft's software than the competition's
software. I believe that we'll never know how secure Linux is, compared
with Windows, until a comparable number of people and systems use Linux.
But despite the fact that Linux isn't as prevalent as Windows, we're
still seeing a dramatic increase in Linux security advisories today. I
think the conclusion is obvious.
MOST UNSECURE OS? YEP, IT'S LINUX.
According to a new Aberdeen Group report, open-source solution Linux
has surpassed Windows as the most vulnerable OS, contrary to the
high-profile press Microsoft's security woes receive. Furthermore, the
Aberdeen Group reports that more than 50 percent of all security
advisories that CERT issued in the first 10 months of 2002 were for
Linux and other open-source software solutions. The report muddles the
argument that proprietary software such as Windows is inherently less
secure than open solutions. And here's another blow to the status quo:
Proprietary UNIX solutions were responsible for just as many security
advisories as Linux in the same time period. Could Windows be the most
secure mainstream OS available today?
"Open-source software, commonly used in many versions of Linux, UNIX,
and network routing equipment, is now the major source of elevated
security vulnerabilities for IT buyers," the report reads. "Security
advisories for open-source and Linux software accounted for 16 out of
the 29 security advisories--about one of every two advisories--published
for the first 10 months of 2002. During this same time, vulnerabilities
affecting Microsoft products numbered seven, or about one in four of all
advisories."
The stunning report makes several claims that seem to fly in the face of
widely accepted beliefs. First, the Aberdeen Group says that
Windows-based Trojan horse attacks peaked in 2001, when CERT released
six such advisories, then bottomed out this year, when CERT didn't issue
any alerts. However, Trojan horse-based attacks on Linux, UNIX, and
open-source projects jumped from one in 2001 to two in 2002. The
Aberdeen Group says this information proves that Linux and UNIX are just
as prone to Trojan horse attacks as any other OS, despite press reports
to the contrary, and that Mac OS X, which is based on UNIX, is also
vulnerable to such attacks. Even more troubling, perhaps, is the use of
open-source software in routers, Web servers, firewalls, and other
Internet-connected solutions. The Aberdeen Group says that this
situation sets up these devices and software products to be "infectious
carriers" that intruders can easily usurp.
According to the Aberdeen Group, the open-source community's claim that
it can fix security vulnerabilities more quickly than proprietary
developers can means little. The group says that the open-source
software and hardware solutions need more rigorous security testing
before they're released to customers. This statement is particularly
problematic because many Linux distributions lack the sophisticated
automatic-update technologies modern Windows versions contain.
We can rail against Microsoft and its security policies, but far more
people and systems use Microsoft's software than the competition's
software. I believe that we'll never know how secure Linux is, compared
with Windows, until a comparable number of people and systems use Linux.
But despite the fact that Linux isn't as prevalent as Windows, we're
still seeing a dramatic increase in Linux security advisories today. I
think the conclusion is obvious.
/u/24313/tuxcrystal6060.png?f=community)
Dit topic is gesloten.