A Secure OS For the Dalai Lama?
Apr 19, 2009, 12:02 (3 Talkback[s])
"...so in the long run, if the attackers want your data, the
entire move is moot. People should choose a platform based on their
productivity requirements instead of purely security. Furthermore,
most of the web servers broken into during these attacks (to be
used as command and control servers) were not Windows, but Linux.
What do you think?
"(While I have the floor I'd also like to take this opportunity
to plug two initiatives where Slashdot readers can directly help
the Tibetan tech community, either through sharing your expertise
or your cash! Firstly, one of the obstacles to migrating to Linux
for a Tibetan speaker is the lack of decent Tibetan font —
can you help? Secondly, Avaaz is raising funds for projects that
will help End The Blackout in Tibet, including a proposal to
support the deployment of Psiphon's circumvention network. Thanks,
or in Tibetan, thuk.je.che!"
- 53 Pages, 10 Months, 1295 Infected Hosts, 103 Countries, And They Still Can't Say "Windows Malware"(Mar 31, 2009)
- The Conficker Worm: April Fool's Joke or Unthinkable Disaster?(Mar 21, 2009)
- Researchers: Macs are less secure than Windows PCs(Apr 17, 2009)
- OSNews Asks: Who'd Be Responsible for a Linux Conficker?(Apr 16, 2009)
- New Attack Sneaks Rootkits Into Linux Kernel(Apr 15, 2009)
- The slow brute zombies are back(Apr 14, 2009)
- Conficker Twitch Leaves Security Sleuths With More Mysteries to Solve(Apr 10, 2009)
- Electricity Grid in U.S. Penetrated By Spies(Apr 09, 2009)
- Security Absurdity: The Complete, Unquestionable,
And Total Failure of Information Security(Apr 03, 2009)
- On Netbooks and Redmond, Death and Taxes(Apr 02, 2009)