Forum Rules - Formats - Spotlights  -  Home - Library - New Additions

Windows proven more secure than Linux for webservers!

Ka0sKa0s
edited February 2005 in Software
According to a study presented by two Florida researchers, Windows is more secure than Linux for web serving.

The pair of researchers, one a Linux enthusiast and the other a Windows enthusiast, recently released their findings at the RSA Conference, a gathering of computer security specialists. The two compared Windows 2003 Server and Red Hat Enterprise Server 3. Their statistics showed that critical vulnerabilities on the Windows platform tended to get patched quicker.


Once I find the link to the article again Ill put it here, but right now I'm going with whats on my clipboard :|

Comments

  • nighticenightice
    Which is because Windows generally has more things to patch.
  • QQ
    "proven" more secure in that it gets patched faster. Exactly what were the statistics though?

    I'd be willing to bet that part of that delay lies in the fact that no one (Unlike MS/Windows) agency is responsible for all the components. Linux is responsible for the kernel, the driver makers for the drivers, Apache for the server itself, etc, etc.

    -Q

    PS. And the title is suspect aswell, one study proving all versions/flavors/vendors of Linux are known to be less secure then Windows is very unlikely.
  • JackTheStripperJackTheStripper
    Don't deny it. Linux is just one big hackjob swiss cheese OS.
  • QQ
    Devils advocate

    Who says I'm denying it, Tom-analog?

    -Q

    PS. I'm not acceeding[sic] to it either.

    PPS. ARGH! And I thought Conectiv was a crap pwr co!

    PPPS. And it's not an OS, it's a kernel. (Wiki loss leaves me feeling pedantic)
  • JackTheStripperJackTheStripper
    Was talking to Niteice.
  • QQ
    Oops ::oops:

    -Q

    PS. Hey! http://m-w.com/firefox/
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • JoshJosh
    That means that RH is used more than Server 2003.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • JoshJosh
    Tomchu wrote:
    jcmoor wrote:
    That means that RH is used more than Server 2003.

    Please don't talk about Linux. You proved your cluelessness to me earlier today. :P
    It's not my fault that there isn't a Windows version.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • JoshJosh
    That was the first time I had ever tried using patch files.
  • BashBash
    I don't personally think that RH is a good idea for a test....

    I would like to know what tests they have done, if firewalls were activated, what ports and so on...
  • QQ
    Fish find the link for this yet?

    -Q

    PS. FWIW, I agree with TcH.
  • BODBOD
    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... ity17.html
  • BashBash
    But that says nothing about which ports, firewalls activated, any updates, if the test was biased in some way. And for me it is kinda hard to believe that IIS is more secure (from my understanding of the text)
    They compared Windows Server 2003 and Red Hat Enterprise Server 3 running databases, scripting engines and Web servers (Microsoft's on one, the open source Apache on the other).

    Their criteria included the number of reported vulnerabilities and their severity, as well as the number of patches issued and days of risk
  • BODBOD
    To make the test fair they should both have been using apache
  • QQ
    Their criteria included the number of reported vulnerabilities and their severity, as well as the number of patches issued and days of risk
  • nighticenightice
    BOD wrote:
    To make the test fair they should both have been using apache
    I don't think too many people buy 2003 Web to run Apache.
  • JackTheStripperJackTheStripper
    Actually, they DO.
  • QQ
    No, but he's just saying that when you run an trial, generally you only change one thing between two specific (What's the word...) subjects.

    -Q
  • nighticenightice
    When you run a trial such as this, it's probably best to run in a typical configuration (IIS - 2003, Apache - Linux).
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • JoshJosh
    Most, if not all of them run IIS.
Sign In or Register to comment.