Gentoo Developer: Is The Linux Desktop Less Secure Than Windows 10?

[aht0]

FYI Android apps don't get total permissions to do whatever the fuck they want on installation, they can only place themselves in /data partitions or other places that can be nuked also by the phone's user, and if the system rejects some of their requirements they either can't be installed or don't work afterwards.

I demand proof. Please show me some proof of this. I've yet to see ANYONE complain about true malware attacks on Android on the internet (most stuff is dumb shit that spams popups but all apps can do that too anyway) on scales that makes that anywhere as bad as it is on Windows.

Well, correct. In 99,9% cases. Android-x86 actually allows rw access to system partition. It's "Yes" or "No" question at one point in the installer, you can go with the "No" and have it read-only as it's traditionally in Android though.

And yeah, haven't yet managed to find malware doing more than spam-popups in typical Android. It's pretty tight.

[mbello]

.
Do you never install or update applications in your Linux system? Because that is 1st source of infection regardless of OS, as installation/update gives them root access. If on windows applications didn't need admin access to be installed you'd be cutting down standard-issue malware stuff by A LOT.

Man, did you not understand that on Linux you actually give root access to the package manager and not to the "application being installed"?

A lot of what was said on this thread was pure BS, and as juno rightly said, the fact that Android does not ask for your password does not make their installation procedure safer.

What I actually think is a good idea and something the Linux distros could do better is to let users choose what permissions each app may have just like Android does. The technology to enable it alreadh exists.

On the other hand, I use a Linux laptop daily for many years now, and there are very very few apps that will request root permissions and those that do are pretty well known and trustable.

[chithanh]

Man, did you not understand that on Linux you actually give root access to the package manager and not to the "application being installed"?

Actually, packages can ship scripts to be run during installation, and those will be happily executed by the package manager with root privileges.

[starshipeleven]

Man, did you not understand that on Linux you actually give root access to the package manager and not to the "application being installed"?

I said so in one of my posts https://www.phoronix.com/forums/foru...755#post929755

But anyone with basic linux knowledge can make a package that will nuke your drives with dd (a classic) or worse, as chitanh noted. Package managers in Linux were not designed with modern security concerns in mind.

Flatpack and Snap should be different in this regard.

A lot of what was said on this thread was pure BS, and as juno rightly said, the fact that Android does not ask for your password does not make their installation procedure safer.

And as I replied to him, Android is safer not because it does not ask for password, but because it does not run the installation with root privileges at all. I cannot tamper with quite a bit of the system while it is running (even if I turn the /system partition rw, assuming I can at all), I need to reboot to recovery (which is an insecure minimal system used for maintenance only).

What I actually think is a good idea and something the Linux distros could do better is to let users choose what permissions each app may have just like Android does. The technology to enable it alreadh exists.

That requires standardization of permissions (Android applications have a permission manifest where they say what they need, and the permissions they can ask for are of course in a standardized list), Linux has only the underlying frameworks that allow the thing to work (SELinux/Apparmor/Systemd's compartimentalization features/docker/whatever else), but there is no standard nor a permission manifest shipped from upstream developers like with Android apps, so most distros don't bother with that as it's a major PITA to see what happens on install/run and make custom settings for all applications.

On the other hand, I use a Linux laptop daily for many years now, and there are very very few apps that will request root permissions and those that do are pretty well known and trustable.

For that matter, also on Windows most applications don't request root permissions to run. The issue is installation or updates, then the application is run as root/administrator and can do whatever.

[duby229]

OSX on what hardware, and in what conditions? Because I was under the strong impression that any Mac running on Core Duo or later processors and with a desktop-grade HDD (7200rpm) or any kind of SSD easily beats windows on similar hardware as far as user experience is concerned.

Performance is actually lower, but user experience (system responsiveness) was pretty good.

That definitely wasn't my experience at all. It definitely felt to me like it was struggling to work. Almost like it took everything it had just to idle. Like I said my impression of it's performance characteristics reminded me of a P4 Willemette running XP. Click a button, wait multiple seconds, then wait multiple more seconds for it to finish drawing the screen.

Please keep in mind, I didn't initially mention how slow OSX felt. I simply read someone else say it and then it reminded me of my experience so I commented about it. Perhaps the drive had bad sectors or the RAM had corrupted address spaces. Who knows, I don't, but it was what it was for damn sure.

[starshipeleven]

That definitely wasn't my experience at all. It definitely felt to me like it was struggling to work. Almost like it took everything it had just to idle. Like I said my impression of it's performance characteristics reminded me of a P4 Willemette running XP. Click a button, wait multiple seconds, then wait multiple more seconds for it to finish drawing the screen.

(makes a question about what hardware OSX was running on, gets an answer that describes better how he saw the slowness, scratches his head a bit)

Anyway, that's not normal behaviour for a Mac, the specimen you looked at was either heavily overloaded or had other issues.

Please keep in mind, I didn't initially mention how slow OSX felt. I simply read someone else say it and then it reminded me of my experience so I commented about it. Perhaps the drive had bad sectors or the RAM had corrupted address spaces. Who knows, I don't, but it was what it was for damn sure.

Yeah, maybe it was the same PC that was also showing Intel GPUs with Intel drivers tearing on Windows.

[duby229]

(makes a question about what hardware OSX was running on, gets an answer that describes better how he saw the slowness, scratches his head a bit)

Anyway, that's not normal behaviour for a Mac, the specimen you looked at was either heavily overloaded or had other issues.


Yeah, maybe it was the same PC that was also showing Intel GPUs with Intel drivers tearing on Windows.

As I already explained I had always just attributed my experience to bad hardware. Also like already explained another user posted that he thought OSX was slow so I commented about my experience.

Yes I still have that laptop and yes it still tears on Windows 7 Aero Glass badly.