Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Security: Unpatched and Doing Fine?

Filed under
Linux

It's been a year since the Honeynet project published the results of their study, which concluded that Linux systems can last much longer than Windows systems unpatched on the Internet. I am sure that to some extent this remains true, but I wonder when I see things such as statistics that claim the highest percentage of attacks are seen on Linux systems and the number two reason they are attacked is because they are unpatched.

This has long been a sore spot for me in the Linux world, not because Linux systems are "unsafe", but because patching (not just for enterprises, but even for home users) on Linux is a pain. Some versions are easier than others, but simply trying to get the patches and ensure that you don't break anything is usually a challenge. And I don't see it getting easier, either.

Just to prove my point, I took a gander at some patching methods for several different platforms:

Full Story.

*yawn*

I just read it...This is just a pointless whinge article. (And it smells like someone was hired by Microsoft to write this nonsense...Either that, or they really had no frigging clue to begin with).

In fact, its a non-issue. You pick a distro, you use it, you learn how to update it, you keep it secure. That's it.

Its a non-issue unless you keep moving distro to distro. If you stick with the one distro from the beginning, you'll do fine.

How hard is it to update "easy to use" distros like Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, etc? Its all clicking with the mouse! (Apparently, according to the article, that is still too hard. If that's hard, then how do people handle Windows Update via the "manually select patches to install" way?)

The article has very little substance, and doesn't offer anything but FUD tones to scare people about maintaining Linux systems.

Even for Gentoo...Is it hard to teach a newbie to type: emerge ?

1000 to 1 the author of that article has never touched a Linux system in their lives...Let alone write about it.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

More in Tux Machines

Leftovers: Ubuntu

  • Snappy Packaging Happenings In The Fedora, Arch Space
    This week Canonical hosted a Snappy Sprint in Heidelberg, Germany where they worked to further their new package management solution originally spearheaded for Ubuntu Touch. This wasn't an Ubuntu-only event, but Canonical did invite other distribution stakeholders. Coming out of this week's event were at least positive moments to share for both Arch and Fedora developers. The Arch snaps package guy made progress on snap confinement on Arch. Currently when using Snaps on Arch, there isn't any confinement support, which defeats some of the purpose. There isn't any confinement support since it relies upon some functionality in the Ubuntu-patched AppArmor with that code not yet being mainlined. Arch's Timothy Redaelli has got those AppArmor patches now running via some AUR packages. Thus it's possible to get snap confinement working on Arch, but it's not yet too pleasant of an experience.
  • PhantomJS 2.1.1 in Ubuntu different from upstream
    At the moment of this writing Vitaly's qtwebkit fork is 28 commits ahead and 39 commits behind qt:dev. I'm surprised Ubuntu's PhantomJS even works.
  • Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS released
    Ubuntu 16.04 is a LTS version of Ubuntu.Now Ubuntu team has announced the release of it's first point release,Ubuntu 16.04.1.This first point release includes many updates containing bug fixes and fixing security issues as well and as always what most of users want from a distribution and most of distributions tries to perform,Stability.This release is also well focoused on stabilty as Ubuntu 16.04.

OSS Leftovers

Red Hat Financial News

Games for GNU/Linux