Toolkit
Story: Linux servers 'attacked more often'
did they control for the number of servers? and how did they distinguish servers from other computers? I'd guess that they measured fewer windows "servers", and have conveniently defined all those compromized windows desktops as "non-servers".
this sort of result is simply blatantly false on its face. look around you: how many windows boxes do you see, and how many of their owners live in fear of the next worm? in my environment (I'm a university sysadmin), I see many hundreds of windows boxes, *most* of which have been compromised in the past year. I also see somewhat fewer (still hundreds) of linux boxes, of which perhaps one a year is compromised, mainly because someone has forgotten it.
Full Talkback thread
Story: Linux servers 'attacked more often'
-
Welcome to the real world Linux! I hope you decide... Dave Oliver -
Not suprising is you consider Linux is used by the... Mark Cope -
mi2g is a dodgy company with dodgy staff in need o... Anonymous -
The MI2G study of servers "did not include other m... David Mohring -
Continued...
ATTACKERS EXECUTING COMMANDS FROM THO... David Mohring -
a) All the windows servers are already compromised... Anonymous -
Most likely open mail relays were considered "comp... Anonymous -
Yes... From my experience, GNU/Linux systems are m... Matthew C. Tedder -
I had to laugh at this comment: "With Windows serv... Joel Stone -
Mi2g is a very dodgy company. I'm not sure you wan... Anonymous -
did they control for the number of servers? and h... mark hahn -
This is just the begining of the mess.
For years o... Spark -
That doesn't mean that Linux servers are bad. The... Anonymous -
Well. I agree that they counted more Linux servers... Sam
Back to: Linux servers 'attacked more often'



