Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

London Stock Exchange got hacked as soon as it switched to Linux

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

  • Thatguy
    replied
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    You are comparing 1% beer with 98% absynth and claim they both have some water. True.
    I think your letting your opinion get in the way of the facts. MS product have very rich network filesharing, service sharing etc designs by nature. They are client/server systems from the bottom up. They are designed to share data and make system adminstration easy from the word go.

    So that said. They have a well documented API and interface that inherently leaves security holes open.

    Now i have a VPN MS network " i am stuck with it nothing else is comparable and I need these applications " that is damn near unhackable.but it took alot of optimization to make it such.

    So everything is encrypted VPN etc but I still have outside network acess. Some of this is done with the router hardware, the server and the clients.

    I do take a performance hit for doing this but its as secure as anything else.

    But linux is more secure as a base install becuase it isn't as feature rich and generally linux users prioritize security over convience.

    So its really just alot of BS.

    now if you want to talk defualt system builds

    Linux is massively more secure then windows. But windows can be secured just as well.

    Its a lie to say anything else.

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by Thatguy View Post
    thats not why windows is insecure and its not why linux is more secure.
    It is. Not main reason but at least second most important.

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by Thatguy View Post
    thats all very debateable. Is inwdows more inherently insecure ?? Well maybe, it certainly has a much richer api for networking and data sharing then alot of linux distros and tool kits offer in a great many ways.

    the vulnerabilitys come from the fact that windows by its nature is more open in regards to how it makes itself available on the network its on.

    Windows and Linux can both be secured, to a point. as soon as data sharing gets involved all bets are off.
    You are comparing 1% beer with 98% absynth and claim they both have some water. True.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thatguy
    replied
    Originally posted by ?John? View Post
    Thank you so much! So I'm not the only one who knows that backwards compatibility tends to be causing much more harm than good.
    thats not why windows is insecure and its not why linux is more secure.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thatguy
    replied
    Originally posted by cjcox View Post
    Also Linux is a thousand times more secure than Windows... just saying. A lot has to do with the paradigm, the way it operates. Windows need for backwards compatibility in everything is probably it's biggest weakness and the source of easy attack.

    So, while we can say "Linux isn't as secure..."... the truth is, that a properly designed Linux based system is MUCH more secure than Windows.
    thats all very debateable. Is inwdows more inherently insecure ?? Well maybe, it certainly has a much richer api for networking and data sharing then alot of linux distros and tool kits offer in a great many ways.

    the vulnerabilitys come from the fact that windows by its nature is more open in regards to how it makes itself available on the network its on.

    Windows and Linux can both be secured, to a point. as soon as data sharing gets involved all bets are off.

    Leave a comment:


  • ?John?
    replied
    Originally posted by cjcox View Post
    Also Linux is a thousand times more secure than Windows... just saying. A lot has to do with the paradigm, the way it operates. Windows need for backwards compatibility in everything is probably it's biggest weakness and the source of easy attack.

    So, while we can say "Linux isn't as secure..."... the truth is, that a properly designed Linux based system is MUCH more secure than Windows.
    Thank you so much! So I'm not the only one who knows that backwards compatibility tends to be causing much more harm than good.

    Leave a comment:


  • cjcox
    replied
    Originally posted by Thatguy View Post
    Linux isn't as secure as many would like to pretend it is, once there is some serious money to be made by hacking a linux system, it will be hacked.
    Also Linux is a thousand times more secure than Windows... just saying. A lot has to do with the paradigm, the way it operates. Windows need for backwards compatibility in everything is probably it's biggest weakness and the source of easy attack.

    So, while we can say "Linux isn't as secure..."... the truth is, that a properly designed Linux based system is MUCH more secure than Windows.

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by gbeauche View Post
    If you read the end of the "article", you learn that the current system is a Microsoft .Net architecture. So, all of this is probably just FUD...
    Nay it was. Big, insecure, unstable and slow. Slow for stock market is very bad.

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by Thatguy View Post
    they don't have to hack the kernel.
    I was refering to rootkits, the rest of ponging software is to be supervised anyway.

    Originally posted by Thatguy View Post
    the point is, everything is vulnerable if its on a network period.
    Yep, Linux needs an AV asap.

    Leave a comment:


  • gbeauche
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    Happened a few days ago. The London Stock Exchange seems to have been hacked when it switched to Linux:

    Computerworld covers a range of technology topics, with a focus on these core areas of IT: Windows, Mobile, Apple/enterprise, Office and productivity suites, collaboration, web browsers and blockchain, as well as relevant information about companies such as Microsoft, Apple and Google.


    Now is this good publicity or not Also noteworthy is the absence of coverage on LWN.net and the like
    If you read the end of the "article", you learn that the current system is a Microsoft .Net architecture. So, all of this is probably just FUD...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X