For users looking to enhance their computers' security, is Vista really the way to go? Or can Linux offer greater protection from hacker attacks? In the face of viruses, worms or other breaches, the answer is clear. Or isn't it ? Let's see some pros and cons.
"We don't need a survey or study to determine the answer. The answer is universal with those that actually manage these systems," said John Cherry of the OSDL Desktop Linux Working Group.
As the five versions of Microsoft Windows’ new Vista operating system sit on store shelves, current Windows users are taking their time before they come to a decision if they will upgrade from Windows XP or buy new computers with Vista installed. The push for buying Windows Vista follows a wave of computer viruses, spyware and adware intrusions and carries the promise of a more secure computing environment.
Linux outperforms Windows XP and Windows Vista for the reason that its architecture is different. Linux inherited its security in large part from its Unix design ideas, also used as the basis for Mac OS X.
There are two major differences that account for Linux's better security name, according to John Cherry, initiative manager for the OSDL (now Linux Foundation) Desktop Linux Working Group.
One, users do not usually log in as administrator, which is often required to run Windows.
Two, mail clients and desktop applications do not automatically execute attached code.
In addition, technologies such as SELinux and AppArmor and stack randomization have been developed for Linux that help to limit the impact of a security breach if it were to occur, he said.
Linux is also better than Windows at recovering from buffer overflows, which are a common attack vector.
"This is best handled at the interface level as a register exploit in Windows," Ken Steinberg, CEO of computer-security firm Savant Protection, told LinuxInsider.
Linux allows software developers to go into the system and fix buffer overruns, he added. However, one can not do that with Windows. |
