Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Phoronix Does Not Make Anti-Virus Software!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
    I realize that, just saying that using IDG may have made you a larger target .
    Ah, okay. Possibly... I have a conference call with them tomorrow so will see if any of their other publishers have hit a similar situation.
    Michael Larabel
    http://www.michaellarabel.com/

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by bridgman View Post
      I guess the price of free software has gone up in the last few years :

      http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...fm/720027.html
      Wow that is so evil !!! I bet that is a stab to many free software developers out there. =(

      Comment


      • #18
        To anyone that may be affected by this, there are many free alternatives to buying anti-virus software for Windows, and it's reliable too.
        Should read:

        To anyone that may be affected by this, there are many free alternatives to buying Windows which is vulnerable to viruses, like Ubuntu and it's reliable too.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by bugmenot View Post
          Should read:
          Apparently Ubuntu has many vulnerabilities?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by b15hop View Post
            Apparently Ubuntu has many vulnerabilities?
            There are several vulnerabilities in ubuntu, mainly in the proprietary closed source garbage that they choose to make available in their default repositories.

            And then, of course, there is the warped view of vulnerabilities that exist in Linux that becomes possible as a result of the way the information about the development and maintenance of the platform components is done entirely out in public for everyone to see. Those closed-source platforms are developed in the dark, and all the developers are forced to work under strict NDA, which means that the majority of *severe* vulnerabilities are never exposed to the public at all -- that, of course, doesn't mean that they don't exist, just that they are being hidden behind a mountain of bennys.

            Of course, all these vulnerabilities are minuscule compared to the vulnerabilities spread by those whose primary mission in life is the spread of misinformation regarding the state of security in Ubuntu, or Linux in general. You must realize that I am referring to those responsible for that platform which is afflicted by these "virus" things, whatever they are...

            Counting public bug fixes is a bad way to compare the security of a platform, the REAL way is to count EXPLOITS -- actually, not just the number of them, but a summation of the death-factor of exploits -- a little function involving the time between first observation and patch, severity of compromise, number of systems affected, etc.



            Now more to the point;
            The world works this way... you have a whole bunch of morons who don't know anything about anything. They'll buy something from some disreputable website without doing any kind of background check on who it is they are buying something from. THIS IS THE SAME kind of person responsible for handing BILLIONS over to MS. They see some ad from a disreputable organization and immediately hand over hundreds of dollars for something of incredibly inferior quality.

            Comment

            Working...
            X