Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on April 12, 2006 12:50 AM
Linux virii *do* exist, though I said nothing about that subject. I said that this thing is as much a virus as a bicycle is a Formula One car. One point, or even a couple points, of similarity is insufficient. Either you do all of the things that define a virus, and do them, or more to the point, *have* done them, in the real world, or it is a just a paper tiger.
And, yes, on your *completely* seperate point that you tried to disguise as the same, system security on Linux needs to properly administered, or it is worthless. It *is* arcane, and difficult, but Windows security so far is just a facade. If you can go from executing code as a user, to executing code as a system process, Windows is toast. This process is easy and quick on Windows, which is why every time a new version comes out, it falls victim to the same class of tweaked exploits as the last.
And as far as zealotry, or what erroneous conclusions someone might jump to based upon my post, that flaw lies entirely in the mind of the reader that does so. It in no way changes the validity (full, none, or somewhere in between) of my statements, just because I didn't preface them with the history of the computer virus, with a computer security primer thrown in as an appendix.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Blah, blah. I remember Red Lion.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 12, 2006 12:50 AMAnd, yes, on your *completely* seperate point that you tried to disguise as the same, system security on Linux needs to properly administered, or it is worthless. It *is* arcane, and difficult, but Windows security so far is just a facade. If you can go from executing code as a user, to executing code as a system process, Windows is toast. This process is easy and quick on Windows, which is why every time a new version comes out, it falls victim to the same class of tweaked exploits as the last.
And as far as zealotry, or what erroneous conclusions someone might jump to based upon my post, that flaw lies entirely in the mind of the reader that does so. It in no way changes the validity (full, none, or somewhere in between) of my statements, just because I didn't preface them with the history of the computer virus, with a computer security primer thrown in as an appendix.
So, there.
Geek Unorthodox
#