Linux systems may be as simple to get into, (although I think even THAT'S debatable), but it's actually quite difficult to write a virus or worm that can do an enermous amount of damage by the simple design of the thing. There is a certain element of truth in the idea, though, that people who use Linux have more interest in how the software works so are more likely to keep their software up to date. I accept that. However, generally speaking, it's almost certainly true to say that for any given user, if they ran Linux software they'd be a hundred times less likely to suffer from viruses, worms, spyware, adware, hackers. crackers, etc. Certainly the latest Linux distro's are actually quite difficult to install in a very insecure manner AND they usually set themselves up by default to check regularly for updates. Well, the ones I've tried anyway. There's an interesting article here relating to this topic by the British journalist John Naughton. [url[http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1553120,00.html[/url] 'But I rapidly learnt this was not what these wretches want to hear. They do not want to be told that they should abandon their Microsoft-ridden machines and worship in a different church. So in the end, I stopped telling them about Apple and Linux and began mouthing the soothing bromides favoured by vicars when dealing with terminal cases.'
There are a number of things that make Unix/Linux (and Mac, since it's base on BSD Unix) more secure: 1. Login as regular user, without Admin (root) rights, but the ability to do certain tasks (using the 'su' command) with root priviledges. 2. Unix/Linux has no Resistry, just separate config files. The Windows registry is easily corruptable, exploitable, and get's bloated in a hurry. One wrong entry or deletion of a registry value, and the system can be completely crippled, or rendered at the mercy of an outside cracker. A config file can be screwed up (if the virus/cracker somehow got root priviledges), but it will only do damage to the program/service that it represents. 3. In Unix/Linux, the kernel operates in it's own memory address space, separate from services, userland utlities, the GUI, and various programs. In Windows, the kernel shares address space with the GUI, and most alarmingly, Internet explorer - that's like leaving the family jewels on the front lawn. 4. ActiveX. ActiveX components can be downloaded from the web, or attached to an email, or executed from a bmp or jpg, and run with admin rights, and gain access to system services. Unix/Linux have no such equivelants. The only similar things are Java Applets or Flash. But these run "in the sandbox" of those programs - the JavaApplet in the Java Virtual Machine in the browser (completely separate from the kernel or services), and Flash with the Flash plugin (again, only in the sandbox of the browser). With ActiveX, there is no "sandbox". An ActiveX exe or control operates in kernel memory space. 5. Unix/Linux have much more rigorous checking for buffer overruns (a C programming concept where text value variables are given pre-determined sizes in memory, but a cracker delibertly overruns the size, then gains execute ability on the host system with that extra unallocated address space). Also, it is very common in Unix/Linux to give data memory non executable priviledges, and execution memory to not have write (data) priviledges. This minimizes greatly the potential effects of buffer overruns. In Windows, buffer overruns are very common, with fewer checks in code, and execute and write priviledges checked less rigorously. 6. New file access priviledges. When a new file is created in Unix/Linux, by default it has read access rights only. You have to use the chmod command to go and add write and execute rights to it. This limits the ability of a virus or cracker to do anything on the host system, let alone damage any files. In Windows, for user convenience sake, new files are given full access rights. Now, Unix/Linux are not perfect, and are not impervious to viruses or crackers. And most certainly, if Linux had the same desktop market share as Windows, it would more security problems. But Unix and Linux are already huge targets for crackers/virus writers (being the dominant platform on the web). And there are sound technical reasons for the superior security in Unix/Linux.
microsoft will be the first country ever to set their foot on the moon. don't buy **************** from nasa. they are all ********ing cheaters.
We've all figured out he's either Bill Gates in disguise or some 10 year old kid with nothing better to do since Mommy took the TV away.