LuTze Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 newbie said in post #50 :As for MS fixing exploits quickly I will only give a quick example which you yourself said; MSBlast. Fixed *after* a worm brought half of the internet to a grinding halt. Thanks Microsoft! [b}Also here is a good link for Linux since its so much better than XP right?[/b]I didn't say it was "better than XP", don't put words in my mouth please. In any case, I'd be suspicious of thier numbers. This type of research seems to take "Linux" to mean an entire distribution, which usually includes every application under the sun. It makes sense that an install of an operating system plus supporting applications has more bugs than an install of just the OS.
Sayonara Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 A 3-month study is neither here nor there, especially with unadjusted data. And, as one commenter pointed out under the article, had it taken Slammer into account the conclusions might have been quite different.
LuTze Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 They don't give any sources for thier data either, apart from a vague reference to a "database" of "attacks" they've had since 1995.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now