If windows is roughly equivalent in security to linux, then why are there so few viruses that break down *nix servers? Is this merely a function of the virus-writers targeting the unsusupecting windows non-technical users? Or is it because windows does in fact have more exploitable security holes. I tend to think it's the latter, because if I were a virus writer and wanted to do serious damage it would make sense to target the servers which hold the internet together (i.e. unix variety) as opposed to the end users windows machines. Speaking from personal experience, my windows machines regularly get infected with nuisance viri and the occasional more serious virus, but I have yet to experience any such nuisance in my freebsd machine. As far as ouhouse express works, I have no problem running attachments from the attachment menu. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jake Anderson" To: Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 10:48 PM Subject: Re: [OT:] Windows/Linux security > in outlook you need to edit the registry in order to even have the ability > to save a program out > outlook express you need to find a buried security tab disable it before you > are able to save it out > once you have disabled the security you can run the program from outlook/e > with a few clicks but if sombody is going to run it they will run it wether > they have to save it or not. > > microsoft has had patches out for all the major worms that have gone around > recently several months before the exploit. > > the problem is the users dont update > windows can be made secure to the point you basically cant use it if your > that way inclined. > windows is roughly as secure as linux when they are both run by compitent > people up to a level good enough for most of the population. > > personally i trade a little "security" for the ability to do just about > anything i want with a nice menu, good help system, and widespread hardware > support. > > -----Original Message----- > From: pic microcontroller discussion list > [mailto:PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of David Koski > Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 1:05 PM > To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU > Subject: Re: [OT:] Windows/Linux security > > > On Sat, 1 May 2004 12:09:32 +1000 > Jake Anderson wrote: > > > >Windows computers partly because the email cients (applications) make it > > easy to > > >execute code (programs) that are received by email. And when a virus or > > worm is > > >executed, a lax security model (the OS) often allows it to take over. > > > > uhh no > > microsoft has made it basically impossible to open any form of attachment > in > > I'm glad to hear M$ has made improvements in Outlook. To be fair, I hardly > use > Windows any more. I would like to hear from others how difficult it is to > execute code received from Internet sources, be it email or not, especially > compared to a Linux equivalent > > FYI, to execute code received in an email using Sylpheed, my email clinent > for > Linux, I have to deliberately select the attachments tab, right click on the > attachemnt, select "save as", then go to the folder where it was saved and > then > set the execute bit before I can execute it. I would think the average > "idjit" > would have trouble getting that far. Actually, I have never done it so I > have > not tested it. > > > > David > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList > mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList > mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads