full-disclosure - [inbox] Re: RE: Linux (in)security

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]

From: lcamtuf at ghettot.org (Michal Zalewski)
Subject: [inbox] Re: RE: Linux (in)security

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Curt Purdy wrote:

>> http://www.linuxunlimited.com/why-linux.htm
>> ``Properly configured and maintained, Linux is one of the
>> most secure operating systems available today.''
>
> The key words here are "properly configured".

Well, once "properly configured", pretty much _any_ operating system would
make it to the top 0.01% of the most secure boxes in the world. I do not
know a single popular OS that would limit your abilities to harden it up
to a point where it is impossible to do it effectively.

I know plenty of systems that lack some nice features, and that make it
difficult to configure and manage overall system security features in a
reasonable manner to make it possible for a "seasoned novice" to find out
what has to be done, and to fine-tune his OS without breaking some stuff
or making it worse.

It's just a matter of how easy it is to properly configure and secure your
system (far beyond downloading most recent patches), and how much control
_and_ supervision you're given over this process.

Popular Linux releases do not score remarkably higher than other
well-known OSes in the above.

-- 
------------------------- bash$ :(){ :|:&};: --
 Michal Zalewski * [http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx]
    Did you know that clones never use mirrors?
--------------------------- 2003-10-23 01:34 --

   http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/photo/current/