Comparing security on Windows and Linux
Source: SearchSecurity - Posted by Pax Dickinson   
Security Software security is quite often a subjective measure, mainly because there is the risk of a security vulnerability being created with every line of programming code. Each vulnerability has a degree of severity which may or may not be important to the end user. The result is an infinite number of interpretations of security, especially in a complex application such as an operating system like Windows or Linux.

A more objective method of rating security is to track the number of bug fixes issued for a particular software suite. When compared to Linux, Windows appears to be more prone to flaws by this measure. Recent U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team (CERT) vulnerability metrics reported 250 episodes for Microsoft Windows, 39 of these having a severity rating of 40 or greater. With Red Hat Linux there were only 46 episodes, of which only with only 3 scored over 40. There are thousands of reports that compare the two operating systems but reports like this by an independent government body, on the relative number of critical flaws between them, should be given greatest consideration.

There are good reasons for this difference in security. For instance, Linux's open source methodology of software development helps to expose errors more easily. This is an advantage Windows doesn't possess. Another disadvantage with Windows is that many of its core applications rely on the use of remote procedure calls (RPC), a method of inter-computer communication that unpredictably and dynamically assigns communications channels. This forces firewall rules to be less rigid than they need to be in comparison with operating systems like Linux that limit the use of RPC.

Read this full article at SearchSecurity

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment!