Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- From: Adam Price <adam+usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 06:55:50 +0000
On 24 Mar 2006 11:57:44 -0800, as400 wrote:
OMG!!!! You got to be kidding me...Out of the box with no configuration at all, they are both exactly as
I am just asking IF which OS is more secure OUT-OF -THE-BOX...WITHOUT
any manual configuring in general....
secure as each other. They both consist of installation media.
At the point when you start an install they start to become different and
at that point the answer depends on which answers you give during the
install.
NOPE Exactly the same before you start the install.
Let me show you an example:
Take Windows and LINUX...Out of the box...Windows would be less
secure..right?????
LINUX is more secure than Windows, but that too... has some securityProve your assertion or take it away.
issues but not as greatly as much as Windows is...Right?
So I would be asking the same question between FreeBSD and Solaris....Either very easy or impossible to answer accuratly without doing a very
Which (for the millionth time)...Which would be generally more secure
when installing with no security tweaks??
How hard can this question be???
detailed code audit on both of the default installs.
IT DEPENDS.
I'm not aware of anyone paying for such an audit on either of these
operating systems.
Adam
.
- References:
- WHat is more secure by default?
- From: as400
- Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- From: Dave Hinz
- Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- From: as400
- Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- From: Dave Hinz
- Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- From: as400
- Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- From: Tim Skirvin
- Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- From: as400
- WHat is more secure by default?
- Prev by Date: Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- Next by Date: Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- Previous by thread: Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- Next by thread: Re: WHat is more secure by default?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|