Linux not so secure

[Pedroz]

I have found a statistics with OS vulnerabilities. They look very interesting. Which OS is on the top? Linux of course :D Watch the stats here: http://securityfocus.com/vulns/stats.shtml What do you think?

[Todd]

With an open source operating system people are bound to find problems in the code more so then with a closed source system like Windows. This actually makes the code stronger and more secure over time.

I also don't know if those statistics were for the OS itself or extras, which may optionally be installed. (ex. FreeBSD ports collection)

I think you perceive the results incorrectly but that's just my opinion.

[Epgs]

yeah it is still proven linux is more secure i think though. or that is the general opinion

[Pedroz]

My only conclusion from this statistics is, that Linux is not so secure as "people" says.
I am not saying that it is unsecure or less secure than other systems. But I see this kind of statistics for the first time and that make on me big impression. Redhat and NT are very similar in vulnerabilities number, I thought RedHat has less.

[Rick]

Unfortunately, the web site did not mention any sort of specifics. There is no absolute security with any system that connects to a public domain, but *nix can be the most, or least secure OS available, depending on how it's set up. If *nix is installed without any root password at all, it's wide open for any casual passerby that wants to exploit it, if it's set up correctly, it is many degrees more secure than any gatesware that has ever been released.
The problem with any *nix system is that it IS configurable. The danger arises when it's configured incorrectly. Windows, on the other hand is not configurable and the security flaws come pre-installed, and require a released patch to close them.

[}:8) Supermoo]

Originally posted by Rick
...and the security flaws come pre-installed, ...

ROTFLMAO

Good one Rick! :)