LinuxSecurity.com
Share your story
The central voice for Linux and Open Source security news
Home News Topics Advisories HOWTOs Features Newsletters About Register

Welcome!
Sign up!
EnGarde Community
Login
Polls
How strictly do your users obey your security policies?
 
Advisories
Community
Linux Events
Linux User Groups
Link to Us
Security Center
Book Reviews
Security Dictionary
Security Tips
SELinux
White Papers
Featured Blogs
Emily Ratliff: OS Security
DanWalsh LiveJournal
Security Bloggers Network
Latest Newsletters
Linux Advisory Watch: November 21st, 2008
Linux Security Week: November 17th, 2008
Subscribe
LinuxSecurity Newsletters
E-mail:
Choose Lists:
About our Newsletters
RSS Feeds
Get the LinuxSecurity news you want faster with RSS
Powered By

  
Linux vs. Windows security Print E-mail
User Rating:      How can I rate this item?
Source: AME Info - Posted by Pax Dickinson   
Security Microsoft and Linux both provide support for authentication, access control, audit trail/logging, Controlled Access Protection Profile, and cryptography. However, Linux is superior due to Linux Security Modules, SELinux, and winbind. The user of a Linux system can decide to add additional security mechanisms to a Linux distribution without having to patch the kernel.

Various access control mechanisms have been built on top of LSM; for example, building compartments that keep applications separate from each other and from the base operating system, which limits the impact of a security problem with an application. Linux base security is further enhanced by solutions, such as Tripwire, that enable System Integrity Check functionality to periodically verify the integrity of key system files and warn those responsible for system security whether a file's contents or properties have been changed.

A limitation of Windows base security is MSCAPI, which trusts multiple keys for code signing. Microsoft's model focuses on providing one build of a product that can enable weak or strong encryption simultaneously. Although modules are not all signed by one key, since MSCAPI trusts a large number of root certifying authorities, and trusts multiple keys for code signing, it only takes one key to be compromised to make the entire system vulnerable to attack.

Read this full article at AME Info

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site.. Such material will be removed.
Name:
Title:
Comment:

Code:* Code

Powered by AkoComment!

 
< Prev   Next >
    
Partner:

 

Latest Features
A Secure Nagios Server
Never Installed a Firewall on Ubuntu? Try Firestarter
Review: Hacking Exposed Linux, Third Edition
Security Features of Firefox 3.0
Review: The Book of Wireless
April 2008 Open Source Tool of the Month: sudo
Open Source Tool of March: ZoneMinder
Yesterday's Edition
Plaintext Recovery Attack Against SSH

QuickLinks: Comunity , HOWTOs , Blogs , Features , Book Reviews , Networking ,
  Security Projects ,   Latest News ,  Newsletters ,  SELinux ,  Privacy ,  Home,
 Hardening ,   About Us,   Advertise,   Legal Notice,   RSS,   Guardian Digital

(c)Copyright 2008 Guardian Digital, Inc. All rights reserved.