then show me 10 worms that affect a linux machine simply by exposing it to the internet
If Linux servers where as popular as Windows servers then there would be more worms - the object of the virus is to compromise the system then launch it'self out looking for another system to compromise...
If I have a virii that only attacks the minority of thre it will be very sloiw to spread and do minimal damage, if not halt itself due to not being able to replicate
That said
Worms for Linux servers: not 10 but hey there is more than one:
Slapper worm
Ramen Worm - this brought NASA to it's knees
Lion Worm
There are virus and worms written for almost any OS out there, if not all.
i used to agree with the whole 'windows is more popular' argument however... if I were a worm coder, and i really wanted to screw someone's world up, i'd be trying to write as many worms as i could for as many http servers i could find for 'nix systems. if the argument holds true, that means there are EVEN MORE holes in OSS/'nix services that could be exploited. it'd be a worm coder's playground. why hasnt this scenario played out yet? with as popular as linux/unix is in the server room, it seems these guys would want to make themselves famous and go for the the gold, like that ramen worm.
You know, I don't know where you guys get your info, but to say "windows is more popular than linux" when we are talking about webservers is just plain wrong. We are not talking about desktops or desktop security here. In the world of web serving, *nix + apache reign supreme - by a big majority. So that whole "oh if linux were more popular it would be more attacked" argument doesn't make any sense in this context. It IS the bigger target.
//edit: hahha i think we were posting (and thinking) the same thing at the same time, lightnin
I really don't think the cost is the deciding factor. Major purchasers like a big company don't necessarily look at the cost of the product - they look at the TCO (total cost of ownership) which takes into account things like supportability, reliability, performance, cost of hiring qualified operators, etc.
Generally Windows and Linux are on the same footing as far as TCO goes. You pay more for Windows licensing, but it costs less to hire an MCSE than a certified or qualified *nix guru, and MCSEs are a dime a dozen. Windows is cheaper to "run", for lack of a better term. This goes back and forth, with various competing "studies" always showing Windows has a lower TCO and then another one showing Unix has the lower TCO, so on and so forth ad nauseum.
Linux is more widely deployed in the web serving market for a variety of reasons. Being first to the game was a big part of it. The fact that up until IIS 5, IIS was a hulking piece of crap didn't help the windows case either. IIS5 was alright, IIS6 is pretty tight, on par with apache for features and performance. But the big thing is open source. open source is, VERY much to Microsoft's chagrin and detriment, a viable model for building excellent applications. Because LAMP (linux apache mysql php) provides such an amazing feature set at such a low cost and is terribly reliable and fast, it is a very very viable competitor to Microsoft's offerings. Microsoft's spin machine is always out to paint the open source stuff as a joke, but really, there's not a whole lot you can't do with that combo, even up to the major enterprise level.
we do some pretty amazing things with LAMP here at work. although i have to admit i HATE php as a language, it is pretty powerful and very easy to learn and use in my opinion. i've gone from thinking the only dbs out there was Oracle and DB2 to thinking the only ones are Postgre and Mysql
only thing about that article, it only took into account apache, how many of those numbers are MS+Apache?
Microsoft's spin machine is always out to paint the open source stuff as a joke, but really, there's not a whole lot you can't do with that combo, even up to the major enterprise level.
Yeah, but any company does this with a competing project. There just is so many distros of Linux and different companies and none are really "huge" so to say, so you only see the 'spin' coming from Microsoft and not vice versa. It's just advertising and marketing.
Comments
then show me 10 worms that affect a linux machine simply by exposing it to the internet
If Linux servers where as popular as Windows servers then there would be more worms - the object of the virus is to compromise the system then launch it'self out looking for another system to compromise...
If I have a virii that only attacks the minority of thre it will be very sloiw to spread and do minimal damage, if not halt itself due to not being able to replicate
That said
Worms for Linux servers: not 10 but hey there is more than one:
Slapper worm
Ramen Worm - this brought NASA to it's knees
Lion Worm
There are virus and worms written for almost any OS out there, if not all.
//edit: hahha i think we were posting (and thinking) the same thing at the same time, lightnin
Generally Windows and Linux are on the same footing as far as TCO goes. You pay more for Windows licensing, but it costs less to hire an MCSE than a certified or qualified *nix guru, and MCSEs are a dime a dozen. Windows is cheaper to "run", for lack of a better term. This goes back and forth, with various competing "studies" always showing Windows has a lower TCO and then another one showing Unix has the lower TCO, so on and so forth ad nauseum.
Linux is more widely deployed in the web serving market for a variety of reasons. Being first to the game was a big part of it. The fact that up until IIS 5, IIS was a hulking piece of crap didn't help the windows case either. IIS5 was alright, IIS6 is pretty tight, on par with apache for features and performance. But the big thing is open source. open source is, VERY much to Microsoft's chagrin and detriment, a viable model for building excellent applications. Because LAMP (linux apache mysql php) provides such an amazing feature set at such a low cost and is terribly reliable and fast, it is a very very viable competitor to Microsoft's offerings. Microsoft's spin machine is always out to paint the open source stuff as a joke, but really, there's not a whole lot you can't do with that combo, even up to the major enterprise level.
only thing about that article, it only took into account apache, how many of those numbers are MS+Apache?
Yeah, but any company does this with a competing project. There just is so many distros of Linux and different companies and none are really "huge" so to say, so you only see the 'spin' coming from Microsoft and not vice versa. It's just advertising and marketing.