Can the wonderful informed people of Sup Forums please tell me why linux is 'better' or more 'secure' than windows? I mean real reasons. Every time I ask an expert it comes down to:
>hardly anyone uses linux so no one develops viruses or exploits for it
Other urls found in this thread:
schneier.com
twitter.com
Linux isn't better or more secure than Windows.
Next thread please.
Unix at its original concept wasn't secure at all. Engineers just sit at the terminals and used computer to do tasks for them. I think it's the transparency of source code makes Linux secure: all hackers involved in its development take care of things behind security.
Linux userbase arent cucks
(((leonart)))
Linux is the most popular kernel in the world. There is plenty of incentive to hack it.
less software is needed to run the platform and it doesn't mix legacy with new software by default. thus less attack vectors.
this is why everyone says linux is more secure. Windows has 20k different ways of doing the same thing while Linux you might not be able to do it without installing something first.
The more secure thing is a complete meme. There was security in obscurity. Linux isn't obscure anymore.
GNU/Linux is likely the least secure OS available. The core root of this insecurity is the xorg/xserver issue, although Wayland is working towards a way of fixing this it is still a long way off.
If you want security, use Windows.
Security features that Linux has:
Versatile privilege separation
Mandatory Access Control (SELinux, AppArmor, RSBAC)
Namespaces (sandboxing on steroids)
Other security enhancements (grsecurity (memory corruption hardening, filesystem hardening), PaX)
Look these up to find out more.
Other than that you can rely on:
Generally better code quality
Open source (higher chances of finding & fixing vulnerability before it has caused damage)
Software that needs security has been proven to be secure over the years (firewalls, webservers, DNS servers, NTP servers, different networking software, storage solutions, etc)
STFU
Linux has never been about security through obscurity.
>implying OP implied desktops only
>implying one package = the kernel or the whole OS
Well for one, loonix wasn't built on insecure shitty authentication mechanisms like ntlm and Kerberos.
>better
Arguable. Better on what?
>more secure
No, security isn't a product. Security is a process.
No. It likely is more secure than Windows, OSX at the very least.
>no one
>develops
>exploits
Bullshit. 95% of the internet works on Linux. Core systems work on Linux (banking, enterprise).
It's very profitable to research exploits. They are found sometimes, they are fixed quickly always.
>No, security isn't a product. Security is a process.
The world only cares about the product variant. Nobody wants extra departments.
> Cars aren't a product either, plz hire traffic managers, mechanics and so on to keep your cars and parking area in perfect state! -signal engineer and qualified traffic manager Joe
> Cars aren't a product either, plz hire traffic managers, mechanics and so on to keep your cars and parking area in perfect state!
B-but that's what we actually do, user.
It's more about the idea that the usual parking space isn't controlled by a traffic manager, the usual company doesn't have a car mechanic except for the brief moments where the law or necessity requires them to.
Also no on-site carpenters despite offices full of wooden objects. Maybe actually just some Ikea or whatever furniture.
And security will be so shit they couldn't even handle a tiny gang with assault rifles! Suckers.
Can someone please explain to me in a non-vague way why Linux is said to be "better" for programming?
The command line setup is much better to work with, at least than on Windows with the idiotic powershell / cmd.
You got tiling WM which are really good for dealing with a lot of windows (maybe your docs, the other docs, a compiler output, your program debug line and the website you generated? plus the music player on the other workspace).
A bit more insight in case things go absolutely wrong and crash right down to the OS level.
Development libraries for C/C++ already installed. Most development libraries generally manageable by package manager.
I don't think you understand how severe the xorg/xserver issue is. It renders every defence mechanism useless, firewalls, kernel hardening etc.
Is it better even if you are writing software for Windows? Windows 10 also has a window manager now too doesn't it?
Basicslly, GNU/Linx is very secure, right up until the point you use a GUI. Then the system can be compromised with no effort what so ever from a third party. As soon as xserver gains internet access, it then renders the system completely vulnerable to attackers, and there is no defence against it.
If you want to use GNU/Linux in a secure manner, do not install X or any GUI and stick to the command prompt
...
>why linux is 'better'
It isn't. It's different.
For a person who wants to have the most complete control over their computer Linux is the logical choice. Because Linux is open source you can theoretically make changes to the operating system kernel if you wanted to. This is impossible with Windows.
From a practical perspective, it's much easier to have a sleek and small operating system with Linux than Windows.
>more 'secure' than windows
Security through obscurity. With a small installed user base and a higher average user skill Linux is a poor target for virus and malware authors. Additionally, the open source nature of Linux allows more eyes to examine the source code and detect security flaws.
Additional note: Linux is free and does not require any kind of registration. It installs in less than 30 minutes and updates itself in less than 2. This is pretty convenient.
What xorg problem?
Xorg is run in userspace on virtually every distribution now.
You can't get a remote shell on a parking space or a wooden flooring, kid.
> Is it better even if you are writing software for Windows?
The question is if you're doing it on .NET or a real cross-platform stack.
.NET is largely Microsoft's own toy, you write that on Windows because frankly too few on Linux cared about it.
If you write C++ and QT, Haskell, Java, Go, whatever - it'll usually be more comfy on Linux.
> Windows 10 also has a window manager now too doesn't it?
It always kinda had a window manager and some things related to tiling did get better (like that they made it relatively easy to do a half-screen windows).
But it has never been nearly as comfortable to manage many open windows as the tiling window managers (plus the in-console variants, screen and tmux and so on) on Linux.
I'm probably falling for a baiting shitpost, but w/e...
On basically every Linux distro, you're using a package manager that comes with it. You can compare a package manager to the playstore or appstore you know from your phone. All software is being installed/updated from the repositories of your distro and signatures of the creators/packagers are being checked when installing or updating software. This ensures that no malicious 3rd party software can be installed on your system, unless you're installing something on your own by bypassing the package repos.
On Windows you're usually downloading and executing installers that bundle malicious/unwanted stuff and those files are also not validated by the maintainers of your OS, making it easy for viruses to exist, unless you're running an antivirus software that slows down your system by running expensive background tasks.
To be honest, the only pen testing I've done is using metasploit and a hail marry on my arch install (running the x server) but it never got through...anyone care to spoonfeed on how x server gets hacked? I'm curious now.
Not that it affects Linux as a headless server, which is where I imagine it is most used.
Won't let me post the link, but if you search the 'invisible things' blog by Joana you will find it, she is the creator of QubesOS. The KDE lead dev put out a video on the issue late last year too, that can be found on their YouTube channel
Xserver hacks are usually key logger injections and rootkits which go completely undetected, a very common one is replacing the lock screen with a program that looks exactly the same as the lock screen in order to acquire the users password.
A couple things that haven't been mentioned yet:
Most desktop Loonix distros(aside from Ubuntu) don't phone home as much as Windows does.
Encrypting suites in the OS actually encrypt and probably don't have back doors.
There's less funky shot going on with certs.
There's syslog/ more diagnostic capability in general
>the open source nature of Linux allows more eyes to detect security flaws
how is this more secure
Thats neither a key logger nor a root kit.
Its a "enter pw here" dialog. Even if that worked (why is that software lock screen even running?)... So the software gets the user pw, how the fuck can it now do anything as root on your Gentoo?
Obviously because flaws get fixed rather than just traded to those that exploit them?
That was just one example of what someone has done in the past, you simpleton.
If the person has sudo installed, all they need is the users password to gain root access, they do not need the root password. This is why it is generally advised not to use sudo.
In the past we could trivially crash the entire LAN of libraries, schools and companies running three versions of windows, so what?
And that was actual technology rather than social engineering
> Please enter all your passwords before standing up:
I didn't read others replies but the biggest reasons I can think of.... (no specific order)
* No license fee. I can download and run as many virtual machines as my hardware can handle. Web sever on one, SQL server on other, etc. ...or on the severs in a cluster.
* Open source. Here's the only way I can think of Linux being more secure than Windows in an actual working environment... If there's a zero-day threat, I could in theory patch it myself, instead of waiting for vendors to patch it for me. ...assuming I have the skills to do that (I don't) lol. That's much more difficult if not impossible to do on Windows. That supposed forced telemetry shit in Windows? If anything like that happened in Linux, I could go in the source code and shut it off anyway, because it's open source.
* Projects. This is the 1st two combined... But say I'm trying to build a robot or something. Because it's open source, Linux is available for virtually all CPUs ever designed. And because it has no license fee, it's very attractive to hobbyists and makes it easier to use without all that licensing mumbo jumbo.
* Updates. Linux has always been pretty savage when it comes to updates. Just type a command and bam! It's updating all applications. There are no centralized ways I know of in Windows.
Only if sudo is set up to grant root privileges with just the same user password, and only if it is set up to allow root in the first place.
Even then, only if it's set up to grant these root privileges on ALL binaries and folders rather than just allow specific things like, say, starting and stopping sshd on a machine with a primitive init scripting that requires root to do so.
Why would you set up your Gentoo like that if you don't want this to happen?
>muh botnet
>hiding muh cp from the ebil goberment
just neckbeards being neckbeards.
I think people need to accept at some point at their life that they are 1 our of 7,000,000,000 people and that their life is very much irrelevant and nobody cares about them or what they do on their computer.
J.P. Morgan, Huntington, Wells Fargo runs Windows, Federal Government and majority of state government runs Windows, you're lying now.
Even if you just count web servers (but not routers, name servers etc. that also power the internet), the majority of the world runs Linux.
And it'll just get more. Asia quite obviously won't really trust either US relations or Microsoft (so it'll be Linux and Android), and they're currently grabbing tons of computers since they still have to catch up a lot.
But even Europe and so on are migrating away from Windows on servers.
And the "cloud" is very much not Microsoft in general. Sure, they like to sell their Azure thing, but virtually no one actually wants it.
>tiny gang with assault rifles
>handle
Ex-State Police and part time security contractor here. No standard security force is qualified to handle ANY sized "gang" with actual assault rifles. Most security forces aren't even trained to handle ONE person with an assault rifle.
Unless you're using truly retarded definitions for assault rifle where it's any mag fed semi auto rifle that accepts attachments
Most distributions come with everything you need to begin programming in C, C#, and C++ (ide, compiler, debugger) and a package manager that allows you to install the libraries and compilers for other languages with one command.
Linux is basically a distraction-free programming environment if you start it without an X-Windows server. If you use a DE/WM it's still perfect for programming, but much easier to get distracted browsing the web and shit(strict command line, when you need to look something up for a programming project it's best to grab the pages with curl or wget and browse them locally as offline documentation)
Yup. So you're not really taking care of that really rather obvious threat profile of one crazy guy with a relatively easily available weapon, either.
Despite all the potential for property damage, work interruptions, loss of key staff, whatever.
You just have like, locks on a bunch of doors and hope you never need more. You could prepare a lot more (that would reduce casualties and make it very hard for such a person to damage a lot of machines and documents) - but it's not a "realistic" concern for the average business.
I really think there is an analogy here.
Although I'd say computers and all the random software that needs to work are more akin to keeping a whole city safe. Actually harder even with some preparation.
Again, you're just making shit up off of what you believe, Microsoft is number #2 in cloud marketshare behind Amazon, Google is an American company, thus so is Android an American made software.
It's matter of preference