OT: More bad news for harry...

[dennis]

I said it goes for all software why do you need to single out windows again?

Only people that don't keep their machines up to date use IE10. M$ don't support it.

Cr@p.

More people per line of code or more people writing poor quality code?

There is plenty of evidence that that is also cr@p. Just look at how long it takes to re-find bugs that have been reintroduced in error.

It was nearly a year for one major one that made all ubuntu machine hackable and what's worse the bug had been published so there were people out there looking for unpatched machine to exploit.

When the fix arrived it didn't check to see if a machine was compromised before the fix was applied so they could still be compromised and the user doesn't know.

Yes, but there aren't tens of thousands looking for the bugs.

[T i m]

You needed someo9ne who knew something about Windows to help you.

Not that there have been any security holes in Linux (inc servers) that have been there for years and years. Maybe all those men in sheds were looking in the wrong place?

Yeah, so you (and your kind) say. Doesn't seem to be the case in the real world though?

Of course they *might*.

So, GHOST, Linux/Rst-B, Troj/SrvInjRk-A, (OpenSSL) Heartbleed,

"At the time of disclosure, some 17% (around half a million) of the Internet's secure web servers certified by trusted authorities were believed to be vulnerable to the attack, allowing theft of the servers' private keys and users' session cookies and passwords.The Electronic Frontier Foundation, Ars Technica, and Bruce Schneier all deemed the Heartbleed bug "catastrophic". Forbes cybersecurity columnist Joseph Steinberg wrote, "Some might argue that [Heartbleed] is the worst vulnerability found (at least in terms of its potential impact) since commercial traffic began to flow on the Internet."

Introduced in 2011 and only discovered in 2014. Millions of eyes looking at the wrong code again?

Windows servers weren't affected.

Drown, FREAK, Shellshock, Troj/JavaDl-NJ etc were all found and sorted right away?

"Apple, Linux, not Windows, most vulnerable operating systems in 2014"

Enjoy (your denial and fantasy).

Cheers, T i m

[tabbypurr]

What a waste of time.

NT

[T i m]

Yes, I know ... either (or both) I should have just left it with W10 and not bothered with Linux at all or not bothered trying to be honest with someone who isn't able to discuss anything rationally. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[bert]

In article , michael adams writes

20% is close enough to bugger all for me.

[bert]

In article , michael adams writes

It does tell us all we need to know about you.

[dennis]

You did notice that those figures were for the linux kernel and not the whole of the OS. As the kernel is only a few percent of the total it would make linux OSes the most buggy of the ones in the table.

[T i m]

Yup, and not surprising really, with 'a million monkeys' (it's a term, not a literal description) putting it together in their sheds (probably communicating via IRC ) it's surprising it works at all!

Cheers, T i m

[tabbypurr]

It shows a linux user base of between 16 & 21%.

5.5%+10.3%+0.2% + an unreported percentage of 5.1% That's a very large swing toward linux so far.

snip

NT

[tabbypurr]

That report only tells part of the story. Linux apps are normaly installed from a relatively safe repository which hosts vetted versions of a wide ran ge of apps. Windows OTOH, we all know how that works. And as the link says, it's apps that provide most vulnerabilities, not the kernel.

It's not one of linux's best years. But it's tiny compared to window's wors t years. Win 98 anyone?

NT

[T i m]

Please don't try to pull that 'they are all running Linux' trick because OSX is not what most people call generic 'Linux' (it's BSD, a 'Unix derivative, as are some parts on Windows NT) and whilst Google Chrome OS is 'based on the Linux kernel', it's still not what most people would call GNU/Linux, just as they wouldn't Android or what runs their router or TV.

'Linux' for the purposes of these discussions is the GNU/Linux you get with the Likes of Ubuntu and Mint and what 'most people' would see as 'Linux' and be comparing *against*, OSX and Windows (not just Windows).

If you were actually confident of your 'facts' you would play it all straight ... ;-(

And I was being pretty generous with the previous link:

(Please note they list all 'Linuxes' under 'Linux' (probably because there isn't the room for all the forked and respun distros but split all the other OS's by version.)

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

You heard about the corrupted Mint images didn't you?

"Hackers made a modified Linux Mint ISO, with a backdoor in it, and managed to hack our website to point to it."

Do you think they were running Windows web servers?

If the hackers can do that why not a repository?

Well, 'most do', some have their heads in the sand (aka 'killfiles'). ;-)

It's probably right.

Has it ever had one (serious question)?

I wonder how many (millions) of people were happily running W98 when very few could get Linux of the same era installed on their machines (by anyone), let alone doing as much?

If all the Linux evangelists spent the time genuinely helping others get Linux working on their machines (instead of all the anti Windows / OSX FUD) then *maybe* Linux might get to where it deserves to be.

Cheers, T i m

[tabbypurr]

so it is linux

but they are linux

snip even more. And no, I don't care. Really.

[tabbypurr]

So 99% of the time linux apps are massively safer, and that's where the main vulnerability is. Hence practical windows desktop installs are a lot more vulnerable than linux ones on average. No news there.

Why should these people spend endless time helping others for nothing? It's not as if it's some important world issue like starvation.

NT

[T i m]

Nope:

The 'Linux' part of 'GNU/Linux' is just the kernel and Linus didn't write the BSD kernel so it isn't 'Linux'. However, both BSD and Linux (GNU/Linux) are 'Unix-alike'.

You would have thought you would have known all this (or at least found out) before making yourself look stupid in public. ;-(

Ask anyone running BSD (or OSX, Chrome OS or Android) what *OS* they are running and they will answer 'BSD', 'OSX', 'Chrome' or 'Android', NOT Linux (or more likely 'Windows' of course [1]). ;-)

Whilst GNU/Linux is 'Linux' as most people abbreviate / refer to it, the fact that my TV or router happens to be running on the Linux kernel makes it no more a 'GNU/Linux' system than my Ford engined Bedford CF campervan was 'a Ford'.

Coward. ;-)

Hmm, so you say, but you still just can't help showing yourself up in public can you. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[1] Correction ... even / especially if they are running Windows many will say 'Office', Google or 'what's an OS?'. Is that because they are stupid? No, it's because they aren't computer geeks and mostly not interested in 'computers' as a hobby or interest (and certainly not a 'lifestyle choice' or 'moral campaign') and just use their machines as the 'tools' they are meant to be.

[T i m]

Cite?

But not the only it seems?

Yes, I'll give you that. Windows can do with some 'hardening' and mot people either do that (by adding some free AV or AM tools Firewall) themselves or get a PC person / shop to do it.

Because they constantly evangelise about FOSS and OpenSource and the 'Linux Community and Free and free and 'helping others for nothing' is

*exactly* what 99% of the newsgroups and web forums are about!

Of course not, no OS is (unless it's managing the world food production of course). ;-)

But again, you are trying to detract from the point.

In most general discussion / help forums (like this one for example) 'many people' will go to huge lengths and effort to help each other FOR FREE, even to the extent of sending people stuff, often at their own cost or offering them time, be it virtual or real. They also do so using empathy and that will mean they will adjust the level of their help to match the skill set or interest or resources of the person asking for help. So, if their question comes across like they don't really have a clue what they are asking, here they will be asked further questions in an effort to give them pertinent and accurate information and help whereas on a Linux group they are likely to be called a 'Windows droid' or 'Troll' and if they are lucky, kilfiled (although as we have seen here, that doesn't guarantee the weird cowards won't still try to answer or just throw stones etc). In many cases the Linux geeks don't want to actually help (why should they 'for free' ... but show off in the hope it will raise their 'oh so important' IQ / group rating. ;-(

HTH (although the fact that I've had to signpost the obvious suggests it probably won't). ;-(

Cheers, T i m

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , The Natural Philosopher escribió:

They're both tedious fuckwits. Killfile = lossless compression.

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , [e-mail] escribió:

He sure does.

It depends on the attitude of the person asking for help. What D i m doesn't understand is that his attitude gets people's backs up, then he acts all offended when they refuse to help him. And when they do he refuses to take their advice and comes back whinging that the problem isn't fixed. Well, d u h .

[tabbypurr]

I expect so. I think he's mainly trolling.

NT

[Vir Campestris]

No news at all.

I might disagree on the numbers, but I'm quite happy to agree that Windows is more at risk. There are more people using it, and more of them are not people who understand computers - so they are a bigger target.

The thing to remember though is that the differences between the systems are ones of degree, not kind. They are all vulnerable to varying amounts.

I've never had a virus, and I've been running Windows systems since NT3.1. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

Andy