[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0309262352090.17524-100000@stratigery.local>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:59:04 -0600 (MDT)
From: "Bruce Ediger" <eballen1@...st.net>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Cc: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: RE: CyberInsecurity: The cost of Monopoly
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Rick Kingslan wrote:
> I'll not argue that the Windows operating systems are the target of the
> majority of virus', but that's typically what happens when a system is used
> by a known large group of people that might not be qualified to run a
> computer, much less secure it.
Doesn't this just constitute special pleading to use Microsoft's products?
For example, this theory is totally unfalsifiable - only Microsoft products
are in such a position.
Oh, wait. Apache has about 2 times the market share of IIS, and I'm
still getting Code Red and Nimda hits TWO YEARS after they were released.
By contrast, I only got about 2 days worth of hits from Slapper.
> The 'bad guys' and 'bored kids' are going to target the largest base - and
> there will always be holes to compromise and exploit. Viruses have never
> been a threat to Open Source because the target is not yet juicy enough.
Yeah, I guess you're right: Apache's 60% market share is just not "juicy"
enough. Despite it being so much easier to write Linux shell code than
Win32 shell code.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists