4 Feb
2016
4 Feb
'16
2:17 p.m.
On 4 February 2016 at 15:07, Mazzini Alessandro <mazzinia at tin.it> wrote:
I would disagree on this point. Unix and linux, in all its flavours, had plenty of
security fixes in the same timeframe mentioned, so I would not consider them as safe as
etc
That they are less obvious to attack, in comparison, is another thing.
Oh yes, true, but you need to think about the roles.
Unix was traditionally mostly used as a /server./ The exploits and
malware are about getting remote access to a server, or at least
taking it offline or rendering it inaccessible.
Windows is primarily a client OS, used for surfing, email, chat,
downloading & running programs, etc.
/Totally/ different usage patterns.
And the vast success of OS X as a client -- now the most successful
closed-source UNIX? of all time, with more installed seats than all
the others ever put together -- compared with the small amount of
malware and very few successful exploits, shows the difference.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) ? +420 702 829 053 (?R)