halicon said:
less vunerabilities were detected in windows then in unix last year.
- It is meaningless to use the absolute
number of vulnerabilities discovered to compare two systems, because it says nothing about a.o. the severity of the vulnerabilities, in which software the vulnerabilities lie (OS or apps), or how long the vendors took to patch them.
- It is meaningless and unfair to compare the number of vulnerabilities in "Windows" to the number number of vulnerabilies in "UNIX" because the term "UNIX" refers to
dozens of entirely different platforms, while Windows (more or less) refers to a single homogenous core. UNIX is not an operating system, it's not even a set of shared code - it's just a 'paper specification'. How many of those were Solaris bugs? IRIX? NetBSD? OpenBSD? FreeBSD? Linux? Darwin (i.e. OS X)? SunOS? HP-UX? AIX? UnixWare? NextStep? Xenix? System V? Open UNIX? (Note technically a few of those are only "UNIX-like" - to be a UNIX operating system you have to be certified to the specification, which AFAIK Linux is not). It seems natural to expect that a whole bunch of operating systems would, combined, have more bugs than Windows.
- Linux is free; Bill Gates is making billions every month. I would somehow expect the far more expensive system to be
far more secure, simply because we pay so much for it, they should be putting far more effort into making it secure (notice how most Windows exploits are still being discovered by third parties, not even by MS? Are they even checking their own source code at all? Microsoft certainly has enough money to fix the problems ... with their profits you could hire over 200,000 programmers!)
- It's easier to find bugs in Linux and BSD because the source code is open. It seems likely that there are still hundreds of undiscovered exploits in Windows, as well as exploits that have been discovered but have not been publicly disclosed and are being quietly exploited on a daily basis to gain access to the private information of corporations (yes this happens and there are hackers who make a LOT of money doing this).
As soon as anyone talks about "number of vulnerabilities" my FUD detectors go off on 'full alert'. The bottom line to me is: How secure is a system
to the end user? I.e. how much security crap (e.g. hacking/spyware/adware/viruses) does the average end user have to deal with, regardless of the reasons? E.g. if I have to recommend an operating system for my gran or dad, which one will give her/him the least worries? Currently Windows is the worst, by far.