Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 21:36:29 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> 2006 is a bad year for all software, Linux included
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| It has proven to be the year of living dangerously, if you are using a
>>| computer that's attached too the Internet - not so much if you're using
>>| a Linux-based machine.
>>|
>>| [...]
>>|
>>| The majority of the vulnerabilities were attributed to Microsoft
>>| operating systems, which racked up 871, while Unix operating systems
>>| accounted for 701 vulnerabilities. The Linux kernel itself came out
>>| fairly clean, with only 38 vulnerabilities directly affecting the
>>| kernel.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.networkworld.com/newsletters/linux/2006/1016linux1.html
>>
>> Finally... a study that sets apart applications from the operating system
>> (unlike a misleading study last year--that which included packages like
>> Apache and had vulnerabilities replicated and aggregated over several
>> distributions)
>>
>> Also today:
>>
>> Internet Security Systems provides server security protection
>> for the latest Linux and Solaris operating systems
>>
>> http://www.securitypark.co.uk/article.asp?articleid=25961&CategoryID=1
>
> Funny how when these studies support Linux, they're lauded, but they're
> bullshit when they support Windows.
>
Wow... the most accurate thing you've ever posted...
--
Jerry McBride
|
|
