__/ [Sinister Midget] on Saturday 07 January 2006 01:56 \__
>
http://news.com.com/Experts+question+Windows+win+in+flaw+tally/2100-1002_3-6021867.html?tag=nefd.top
> http://tinyurl.com/9shch
>
> Critics have taken aim at a study published by the U.S. Computer
> Emergency Readiness Team that said more vulnerabilities were found
> in Linux/Unix than in Windows last year.
>
> The report, Cyber Security Bulletin 2005, was released last week. It
> claimed that out of 5,198 reported flaws, 812 were found in
> Microsoft's Windows operating system, 2,328 were found in
> open-source Unix/Linux systems. The rest were declared to be
> multiple operating-system vulnerabilities.
>
> The report has attracted criticism from some in the open-source
> community. Linux vendor Red Hat said the vulnerabilities had been
> wrongly tagged, and so could not be used to compare the relative
> security of Windows and Linux/Unix platforms.
>
> "The study is confusing and misleading. When you look at the list,
> the vulnerabilities are miscategorized," Mark Cox, a consulting
> software engineer at Red Hat, said. "For example, Firefox is
> categorized as a Unix/Linux operating-system flaw, but it runs just
> as well on a Windows platform. Apache and PHP also run just as well
> on both platforms. There are methodological flaws in the
> statistics."
>
> In addition, Steven Christey, an editor for Common Vulnerabilities
> and Exposures, an organization that maintains a common vulnerability
> database, said that the statistics were no basis for comparison of
> the relative security of Windows and Linux/Unix, because they had
> been collected from different sources with different criteria for
> the collection of flaws.
>
> Yeah. If they get it from a MICROS~1 cadaver (aka "partner") the
> monopoly's flaws are features and enhancements, while anything
> associated with linux gets listed as a flaw, even if it's deliberately
> designed to do what it does.
It is relieving to see that mainstream media is at least tactful enough to
post clarifications on the matter. CNET were snubbed by Google before. Don't
be surprised to see the same from Microsoft, but then again, CNET remain
Windows-inclined. Why do they not mention the factor of several operating
systems being 'housed' under the same figure?
Also notice: "The report has attracted criticism from some in the open-source
community". Why not just say "the report is improperly assembled"? They make
it sound subjective. They make it seems like it is subjective. Like it can
be interpreted in a variety of ways.
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Coffee makes mw to0 jittery
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
4:30am up 27 days 11:41, 14 users, load average: 0.13, 0.39, 0.48
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
