full-disclosure - Counseling not to use Windows (was Re: Anonymous surfing my ass\!)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <008001c22c36$ee4e4c00$0a00a8c0@violetclub>
From: mail at blazde.co.uk (Roland Postle)
Subject: Counseling not to use Windows (was Re: Anonymous surfing my ass\!)

I should mention that I'm only referring to Windows NT here, Windows 9x /is/
one monumental design flaw and not even worth talking about.

> That is true when it comes to memory protection, but what you're
> talking about is filesystem protection, and Linux doesn't "pretend"
> anything -- it enforces it.  I believe it is possible under some
> versions of Windows to allow read access but not execute access to
> files and directories, but again, 99% of end-users don't know this
> and don't configure it.

It's hardly a 'fundamental design flaw' if it can be configured differently.
Many default unix installations will leave all a user's newly created files
with world read access. And I bet the vast majority of novice computer users
(the ones most at risk) would find it easier to change their file
permissions on a Windows machine than a unix machine.

The fact that 99% of Windows users are clueless is no reflection on Windows'
actual security.

- Blazde