On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Thomas Charron wrote:
> I found this article interesting. Misleading as hell, but interesting,
> nontheless..
>
> I would like to see a site that publishes the Bugtraq lists to refute them,
> anyone have a URL? I think the biggest thing that is 'missing' here is that
> RedHat's bugs most probrably include all apps published *WITH* the operating
> system, versus NT's, which strickly list OS vulnerabilities..
>
One point I never see mentioned:
Microsoft vulnerabilirties are just that -- Microsoft's.
Any app that runs on on Linux or distributed with Redhat/Turbo etc. is
counted as a "Linux vulnerabilty".
If one were to lump in all the other Win32 apps with vulnerabilities I'm
sure you'd come up with a greater number than 99 (number of reported
Bugtraq MS vul) or even 122 (number for all linux apps).
Bottom line, neither OS is inherently insecure, it's the apps and cruft on
top of them, like Sendmail, IIS, ActiveX etc.
--
Niall Kavanagh, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
News, articles, and resources for web professionals and developers:
http://www.kst.com
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
