On Sat, 07 Jun 2003 17:42:18 -0600 FemmeFatale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> uttered:
> sorry joe i don' tbuy that. Hehe... i read alot of security focus > articles and well call me totally tinfoil hat paranoid but i tend to > believe linux can be just as vulnerable to virii as winsux. Theoretically, yes. But that's like saying because it's theoretically possible to break into a bank vault, then that bank vault is just as vulnerable as my house. For a virus to be effective, it requires a certain environment, and that environment simply does not exist under Linux. This is according to current definitions of what a virus *is*, of course, but as Stephen pointed out, lotsa people *have* tried to code virii that will automatically infect a Linux box, but have never had much success. Those Sec Foc reports are fatally flawed in one main respect: they count any free or open source platform as Linux, even though there may be third party software involved (ie. non-Linux). But they also give every exploit equal weight, when any security expert will tell you that the actual or potential threat varies between exploits. Windows is not built to be secure, Linux is. -- Joehill Registered Linux user #282046 Homepage: http://nodex.sytes.net 20:20:49 up 4 days, 18:24, 4 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
