How does Linux compare to the "most secure OS on the planet"? (According to SUN)
Linux - SecurityThis forum is for all security related questions.
Questions, tips, system compromises, firewalls, etc. are all included here.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Heh, I remember back in '98 when Ehud Tenebaum used a vulnerability in Solaris to wreak havoc upon the Pentagon. And it wasn't zero-day or anything, it was just that the Pentagon servers weren't patched even though the vulnerability was well-known. Hopefully the term military-grade has more meaning today.
Sun's claim that Solaris 10 is "the most secure OS on the planet" is obviously nothing but marketing hype. Maybe it's true. Maybe it's not. You can't really know that because security depends on so many things other than the software itself. I'd like to think most of us are aware that security is not a product, and as such it's pointless how good Sun says Solaris 10 is if it (or any other OS) isn't supported with solid policies, methods, procedures, and practices on behalf of the human beings that actually use it.
Well, I am working as a Unix/Linux sys admin and have experience in both Solaris and Linux (P.S. I am still biased toward Linux though).
Its a myth, no one can claim that certain OS/software is non vulnerable. Vulnerabiity is directly proportional to the years of usage. Once you get strangle-hold of the OS internals, its possible to hack anything.
Sun can claim it to be most secured but then loop holes are everywhere. They wont be so common as in Windows but its more of a debate then anything else.
Good thing about Linux is that we have huge developer base who work for non-profit opensource community hence the fix would be quick as compare to annything else.
I have seen Solaris getting crashed due to some processes so its pre-mature to say that it is the most secure OS. However, both Linux/Solaris are extermely secure unless a novice set them up.
which spreads by copying itself to thumb drives and the like. When that drive or disk is plugged into a second computer, the worm replicates itself again — this time on the PC. "From there, it automatically downloads code from another location. And that code could be pretty much anything,"
How does the worm execute when you plug the usb into the usb drive without the user initiating the executable to run?
Don't Sun boxes come with Telnet, rpcbind, and SNMP wide open? At least all the Sun boxes I see do.
That used to be true but it's now an installation (by default) choice with Solaris 10 1/06 and newer. The secure by default option closes all remote services except ssh.
I agree with the previous statement about security being a process more than a feature. Of course it helps if the underlying OS has good observability and specialized security capabilities. Solaris certainly does a good job here.
Poor administration and application weaknesses can make any OS vulnerable, including the most secure ones ...
It's entirely a myth that any operating system is "categorically secure" or "categorically insecure."
Microsoft Windows has an extremely well thought out security architecture ... especially nice when you need to manage many hundreds of systems at one time.
But...no amount of "well thought out security architecture" is going to do anyone a tinker's-dam worth of practical good when you've got everyone set up as an all-powerful Administrator! (In effect, "all that security" is turned off!)
Security is a process. Don't matter if you're talking about a computer or a house: "the lock, alone" does not make the difference. You've got to consider not only the lock, but the door and the frame, and whether-or-not there's an open window nearby, and whether-or-not "the dammed fool who owns the house actually locked that 'impregnable burglar-proof door.'"
Linux... OS/X... Windows. Allthree are competently designed systems. All three are capable both of security and tomfoolery.
I've never considered Windows "secure". But Sun, I can't tell you how many Solaris 10 boxes I've rooted, and getting into them was alot easier than most linux boxes. Most secure OS on the planet my ass.