On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 07:44, Lawson, Jim wrote:
> Not true Anne if you implement security in windows everyone is not a
> admin.
> But The fact that knnopix can access any windows file system is dangerous to
> me to run Windoze.
>
> I read an article the other day that said mandrake 9.1 and other stuff can
> easily reset Windoze passwords. Evewn the administrator one. I don't like
> this. this is why I am asking this question.
>
> I happen to love Linux. You don't have to convince me. I have to convince my
> bosses. IT Director. That is why I am asking these questions to the expert
> group so I have more evidence that Windoze has to go.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frankie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 9:55 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [expert] Password Question
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Lawson, Jim
> >Sent: Thursday, 21 August 2003 8:39 PM
> >To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> >Subject: RE: [expert] Password Question
> >
> >
> >Anne it is from a secruity postion. I want to find out ow much more secure
> >Linux is than windows.
> >
>
> Well that is easy...
>
> 1. A file in linux is not executable until you tell it its executable.
> A file in Doze IS exectuable by virtue of having an executable
> extension. (.bat, .com, .exe etc).
>
> 2. In windows, everyone is the administrator, so anyone can totally trash
> the system.
> In Linux, everyone is a user, so can only trash their own user space.
>
> 3. literally thousands of virus's/worms/trojans have been written for
> windows.
> Literally a tiny handful of test virus/worms have been written for
> linux.
>
> 4. Windoze is all open from scratch, and its up to the user to tighten it
> up.
> Linux is by default much tighter then windows, and its easy to tighten
> it up more. (for example with msec on mandrkae.)
>
>
> As for the password issue, win95 provides practically no password
> protection at all, and what little it does provide is easy enough to
> circumvent.
>
> NT/2000/XP/2003 are much better in that regard, but a ton of flaws have
> been found to get around them as well.
> (for one thing, apparently you can use a win2000 CD to access XP partition.
>
> So, take your pick..
>
> hundreds of government bodies that are switching to linux en mass after
> years of windows dominance is a telling indicator of where their faith is..
>
> Having said that, If you take a winXP or 2000 system, fully patch it.. get
> rid of IIS, IE and outlook Express.
> (replace with apache and mozilla browser and mozilla mail for windows
> respectively)
> and run a firewall and antivir program or two would be pretty secure
> comparitively as well.
>
> Still not as tight as a well concieved linux install, but pretty good none
> the less.
>
> But we are a linux list so I will not push you in that direction.
> Also, keep in mind that the M$ version will cost you a whole heap more.
>
>
> regards
>
> Franki
Franki,
Where windows is a lot more fragile than Linux at the command line
there are a few things I have fun with.. Drop to DOS and you can remove
pwl files which are the windows version of /etc/password. Not it may
not give you access. But it sure does cause problems. One thing to
note. If you give me console and access to a cdrom and or floppy. I
can on about 90% of the systems in either Linux or Windows, begin to
access things I shouldn't be able to. Note that this takes bringing the
computer down, then back up. In a windows world watching for reboots
would be an effort in frustration, since although 2000 and XP are a lot
more stable reboots are still a normal course of business in dealing
with windows related problems for the user. In Linux the user should
rarely reboot. So watching for those could be a security boon.
What's more important would be things like. External security.
Hardware costs (an older 750mhz 128MB ram box makes an excellent file
server for groups or divisions, or heck it makes a great desktop. Also
the need for monitors etc goes down. Since you only need a shell to
maintain servers. So the company can spread out capital expenditure
over years instead of months.) IT costs (one Linux IT person per 30
boxes vs one MCSE per 10 boxes.) Productivity loses. (Less time spent
rebooting means more time working.) Monitoring. (compare Linux logging
to XP) System integration into a windows world. (They can slowly
replace boxes and still keep intreroperability.) Data Integrity.(Yes
windows has a trash can but Linux is better suited for backups both full
and partial, as well as restores. In Unix backups are built in not added
on.) Networking (I recently had a pIII 650mhz box with 64 megs ram
survive a slashdoting, and this didn't affect any of the other sites on
the box.)
Finally talk about remote admin/viewing. Show them what can be done
from a shell over ssh. Show them VNC (people around here are just
starting to understand the idea of 4 boxes 4 people and a shared desktop
for developing.) Show them urpmi and MDK, or Lycoris and it's "gee you
mean it's not windows?" desktop. The largest learning curve with Linux
for a business desktop is the one needed to explain how small the
learning curve is to switch from windows.
james
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
