Hello,

I am using Ubuntu for nearly everything and I'm working more and more with security software and I was wondering why most of my colleagues use Backtrack instead. I know because most of them use windows its easier to have a preconfigured system to work with but so far I've been able to do everything with ubuntu.
In short: Can I get some valid arguments to switch to Backtrack for these purposes?

thanks, Steven

Backtrack is set up for doing that kind of work. All the relevant packages are installed, and irrelevant packages aren't.

The boot menu is set up with many boot options, for forensics, networking, mounting, etc.

It is really a convenience thing, having most of the packages you need for that type of work, all there, installed configured etc. Rather than having to go looking for them, often those types of tools wont be included in Ubuntu's package lists, and would have to be compiled from source.

There may be some minor issues getting some tools to work with some alternate distro's, but the majority of the tools included with backtrack should work fine with any other Linux distro.

Okay, thank you. It seems that I'll be using ubuntu by default and switch over to backtrack if I miss something.

Why switch to BackTrack at all? You can easily install the packages used by backtrack in Ubuntu and you get the added benefit of being able to leave out the redundant programs and selectively pick and choose what gets installed.

that was actually the point of me asking that question here But not everything is easilly installed on ubuntu, I'll use ubuntu until I run into problems with software on there.

One of the advantages, if you can use a Live CD (/DVD), is that in spite of working in 'dubious' circumstances, you are unlikely to get your OS 'hacked'. This is less of an advantage if you feel that you can't just (easily) get everything that you want on one handy live CD, or, for some reason, a live CD isn't suitable.

Security software from a group of security professionals (let's say hackers) leaves you with a two edged sword. On one hand the distro may be totally secure. On the other hand it may contain code that could render your system less secure.

There is no secure OS for the most part. BSD's have claimed some titles for a while but the issue is that thousands of apps installed create holes.

Consider a hardened OS. Learn and use as many best practices as you can to avoid issues. Keep it up to date.

Live cd's are a pretty good choice for limited access.

@Jefro ok... but I'm someone who wants to do these hacks and scans and tests using the software I can install on ubuntu and is already installed on backtrack like wireshark, aircrack-ng, ettercap and more like that I've always been able to do this on ubuntu and it's easier to do because I also document and have my old documentation on there usually.

I wanted to know if it would be a good idea to start using backtrack from now on. But I don't see any reason to do that cause I'm happy with Ubuntu atm and there is nothing I can't do on there.