| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Linux is favourite hacker target: Study | |
|
||
| Time: 12:34 EST/17:34 GMT | News Source: Globe News | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
Thanks RMD. "Linux, not Microsoft Windows, remains the most-attacked operating system, a British security company reports. During August, 67 per cent of all successful and verifiable digital attacks against on-line servers targeted Linux, followed by Microsoft Windows at 23.2 per cent. A total of 12,892 Linux on-line servers running e-business and information sites were successfully breached in that month, followed by 4,626 Windows servers, according to the report. " | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:38:24 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 9549 (63.88.169.2) at 9/12/2003 12:45:49 PM |
|
57+ posts to follow This post was edited by cto on Friday, September 12, 2003 at 12:46. |
| #2 By 2332 (216.41.45.78) at 9/12/2003 2:16:49 PM |
|
Oh come on! I wanted to see an argument!
They've got a good "deny it and it will go away" thing going on over at Slashdot, and I was looking forward to see what the Linux apologists on Activewin had to say. Oh well. |
| #3 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 9/12/2003 4:42:06 PM |
| Linux is unimportant these days, more pressing issues to deal with. Stay tuned for September 17th! |
| #4 By 5912 (217.121.189.8) at 9/12/2003 8:41:56 PM |
| Hmm.. maybe that SOMEONE is able to draw some kind of conclusion out of this information, but I certainly can't. |
| #5 By 6253 (12.237.219.240) at 9/13/2003 8:31:41 PM |
|
This study focuses entirely on Internet-based attacks. Historically, the greatest threats in information security have been from internal/insider attacks. That's why you're not supposed to share your password with your coworkers, even though they wouldn't need to launch an attack from the Internet.
Excluding a relatively small number of high-profile cases, the supposedly-plentiful Microsoft security holes are frequently vulnerabilities which require physical access to a system or other insider access such as an unprivileged account which can be elevated. None of those scenarios are applicable to this study. The bottom line is that Windows has never really exposed much attack surface to the Internet. You could do the opposite study and focus entirely on internal attacks. If you did, you'd probably find Windows to be the overwhelmingly favorite target. And what would either one of these two studies really mean? That the people doing studies made some money. That's about it. |
| #6 By 2332 (65.221.182.2) at 9/14/2003 1:28:34 AM |
|
#15 - "Historically, the greatest threats in information security have been from internal/insider attacks."
That's because, historically, companies left their internal networks completely unsecured because they only considered outside sources of attack. Many companies still have the belief that a firewall is a catch all and therefore internal security isn't a big issue. "Excluding a relatively small number of high-profile cases, the supposedly-plentiful Microsoft security holes are frequently vulnerabilities which require physical access to a system or other insider access such as an unprivileged account which can be elevated." There is no such thing as security if you have physical access to a system. Period. Case closed. If you have physical, unrestricted access to your company's servers, then your company's servers are not secured from internal attack regardless of what OS they're running. Privledge elevation has little to do with physical access. I can use privledge elevation just as easily from the internet as I can from local access. In both cases I have a valid login to the computer in question. I know of no privledge elevation attacks that require physical access. If you're suggesting there are more vulnerabilities that allow a valid user to elevate their privledges on Windows than on Linux, than I suggest you do your homework a bit more. Privledge elevation has been a very common problem on almost all flavors of Unix for a long time. "The bottom line is that Windows has never really exposed much attack surface to the Internet." You're kidding, right? Most of the fortune 500 companies run Windows servers, and last time I checked, most of the fortune 500 companies also have web sites. In addition, probably 90% of home computers are online, and 95%+ of those are running Windows. All of these are exposed to attack. "And what would either one of these two studies really mean? That the people doing studies made some money. That's about it." Sure, you can also find potential bais in any study, but potential is all it is unless you can find evidence otherwise. Find fault in the study to show the bias, don't try and use potential bais to show fault in the study. This post was edited by RMD on Sunday, September 14, 2003 at 03:55. |
| #7 By 135 (208.186.90.91) at 9/14/2003 4:01:20 PM |
|
Perhaps Sodablue is pregant and due on the 17th?
Even better than that!!!!!! This week is so bloody exciting!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:38:24 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
