[Klug-general] Linux to offer a paradigm-shift in computer security

[Karl Lattimer]

On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 11:36 +0000, George Prowse wrote:
> Karl Lattimer wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 10:13 +0000, Karl Buckland wrote:
> >> Stephen Ryan wrote:
> >>> thanks to all for the constructive advice and for some small pokes in 
> >>> the eye.
> >> But anyway, it's all very good saying that a new perspective on security 
> >> is needed - what would that change be? If anyone had any good ideas on 
> >> that front then we might already be reaping the benefits...
> > 
> > Ban email, ban internet explorer. You've just cut out 99% of virus
> > attack vectors. 
> > 
> > K,
> > 
> Ban anyone under 21 and you have near enough 100%
> 
> Anyway Stephen, I think you are thinking cross purposes, any system 
> isn't inherently secure it is *always* only as secure as the person 
> making it secure.  For instance, everyone here (because it is a linux 
> list) will tell you that windows is insecure but windows can be just as 
> secure as linux in the right hands, it's just that out-of-the-box it's 
> security is a pile of shit.

Yeah, you enable the firewall that's disabled by default (XP SP2 CD's
are rare), you add a third party antivirus product on (which doesn't
work properly because of patchguard), you then start using internet
explorer and yahoo mail.

Sure windows can be made secure, but in reality anything that is a
pairing of internet explorer,the most insecure web browser in the world,
and the worst at rendering and services like Yahoo mail, where its not
just the dodgy emails that get you, yahoo have had their ad providers
hacked/poisoned a couple of times too.

The reality is, there's probably about 15 people in the world where
windows can be a truly secure OS for them. Other than that its just
flocking in swarms to avoid the sharks. 

K,