is red hat safer then winxp

OMEGA-DOOM · 05-18-2004, 04:05 PM

cyph3r7 · 05-18-2004, 04:10 PM

wow, thats a loaded question.

Either are only as safe as the administrator behind the keyboard.....

XavierP · 05-18-2004, 04:17 PM

A very patched WinXP with an up to date firewall and a very good, tight firewall, with users set as users and not admins, with sites that will give spyware blocked, with XP and software configured to be safer is perfectly safe - as long as your user doesn't download anything damaging.

On the other hand, RH, patched and behind a firewall is also very safe - as long as you're not running as root.

It would help if you let us know what configurations you are thinking of, or is this just a 'general' question?

Khabi · 05-18-2004, 04:40 PM

I would have to say it could go either way. Security is only as good as the dumbest user on the network. I could spend hours and make a windowsXP machine and a linux machine just as tight. But if a user comes along and installs something they shouldn't or starts tweaking settings then its all in vein.

Poetics · 05-18-2004, 04:55 PM

Security is not always just about hardware and software

As Khabi said, it's the user as well. Yay social engineering!

The server admin has the most responsibility for not only locking down his/her network, but instructing the users on what and what not to do.

Remember, the safest box is one that isn't powered up!

-- Poetics