Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Code Red Worm

Code Red Worm

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
sysadminlinuxsecurityquestion
24 Posts 15 Posters 4 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A Anders Molin

    My point though was that with RedHat the box is accessible by any employee who is passing by your server and happened to remember the "magic word". Is it "singleuser" you are thinking about. If you can get locally access, you can log on to any linux machine, with root rights, as singleuser... - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"

    K Offline
    K Offline
    Konstantin Vasserman
    wrote on last edited by
    #21

    Yes, I think that this is what I meant. I just could not remember the specifics.

    O 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • X Xian

      i don't know anyone who runs windows of any flavor as anything but admin. I run Windows2000 and I sure don't run as Admin. Now you know someone. Nice to meet you. :mad: And fyi, I am a linux user of a few years and I still find Windows to be my OS of choice. Your "almost everyone" and "most" generalizations are not very accurate in my experiences, so yes, it is a matter of opinion. Realize that. ---- Xian

      R Offline
      R Offline
      Richard Lund
      wrote on last edited by
      #22

      I also run Windows 2000, and try my best not to run as Admin. However, it's darned difficult! :mad: Half of Microsoft's own programs don't work correctly (Microsoft Money, anyone?) and things like the "Install on first use" from Office simply falls over in a heap. Plus from time to time permissions on files seem to get reset so only the logged-in user can read the file, killing things I share between users. I tried Linux many moons ago, and after a while of struggling, felt hugely proud of myself when I got it running, and spent a fair time writing little C programs to interact with the window manager. Then I got bored, and had to do some work, and I didn't have anything other than a window manager and a few card games on Linux, so... back to Windows.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • J John Simmon outlaw programmer

        Yet another worm that has something to do with Microsoft. Microsoft always have security holes. This is a big security hole with yet another downloadable patch. My Message to Microsoft : You suck in the server market Why ? Too many Security holes. Not Stable, etc. The list goes on and on. Microsoft doesn't have the ability to create stable products. So i switched from Windows 2000 to RedHat Linux and boy am I happy. There are hardly and security holes with linux. Linux is also very stable. ;P By the way i only like linux for the server market. I am a Window fan when it comes to personal use simply because it's easy to use. Sarah


        Warning: This is my personal opinion. This message was not intended to hurt anyone. If you are disturbed, please contact your local physiatrist. :((

        P Offline
        P Offline
        Paul Watson
        wrote on last edited by
        #23

        Ok I do concede that Windows Servers generally are a bit less secure than their Linux equivalents. IMHO that is to do with the simple fact that Microsoft offer so many features along with their products. I am pretty sure that as .NET takes off (which I hope and feel it will) more holes in security will be found and plugged. Linux is stable because it is perhaps not quite as diverse and feature rich as Microsoft Servers. However my main thought on why Linux has far fewer holes is the simple fact that because it is as not main stream as Windows fewer virus writers and hackers have focused their attention on it. Simple really. The same was true for mobile phones until someone wrote the first virus for them, now there are plenty viruses floating about for mobile phones. The holes in Linux simply have not been fully explored yet. I will take a bet that as Linux grows in popularity with main stream business more holes will be found. IMHO :-D regards, Paul Watson Cape Town, South Africa e: paulmwatson@email.com w: vergen.org

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • K Konstantin Vasserman

          Yes, I think that this is what I meant. I just could not remember the specifics.

          O Offline
          O Offline
          Obliterator
          wrote on last edited by
          #24

          IMHO NT suffers far more from security flaws than any thing else, the whole MS attitude is wrong towards security - it simply isn't a priority. Read the MS security bulletins - half the fixes simply state "disable this feature" - thats not a fix! Both systems can be fairly secure, but you require a good knowledge of each system to ensure it. I'm simply not a believer in out of the box security. As for NT, there are far worse problems than the "magic word". There are patches out there which allow you to boot from floppy and create your own administrator account without ever having logged into the NT server. Your telling me thats secure?! -- The Obliterator

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          Reply
          • Reply as topic
          Log in to reply
          • Oldest to Newest
          • Newest to Oldest
          • Most Votes


          • Login

          • Don't have an account? Register

          • Login or register to search.
          • First post
            Last post
          0
          • Categories
          • Recent
          • Tags
          • Popular
          • World
          • Users
          • Groups