rjdohnert wrote:UNIX is not hacker or vulnerability proof, neeither is Linux. The only system that can be hacker proof is one disconnected from the net. The security guys are not spreading fud. The only reason why UNIX wasnt cracked more in the 70's is becausethe Internet
Hackers had the same amount of time to exploit Unix as they have Windows and Dos. Network connections had nothing to do with it. Windows and Dos falls every time. Unix doesnt and Linux most certainly does not. Its the design of the system, while Microsoft
was busy trying to build an OS
Er...you mean while Microsoft was making billions selling an OS?
with which to lock in their monopoly the Linux and even Unix groups were building a more secure OS that doesnt crack under pressure.
I'm not sure how you could say that. There aren't enough people using it to qualify as 'pressure'.
Bill Gates put out a memo having to tell his programmers to pay attention to security,
Yes he did. Now how is that a bad thing?
which showed Microsoft didnt care from day one.
Ah...ok. It's possible that MSFT didn't care at all about security from day one. It's also possible that they were too busy making money that they didn't have the luxury of time to sit back, take a bong hit, and come up with new ways to hack a system.
*nix guys, on the other hand...
When have you ever seen a memo like that have to come from the kernel group or ANY Linux or Unix vendor for that matter?
See, now you're just being silly.
*nix doesn't have vendors, groups, or memos either. It has dirty hippies, bowls, and "karmic insight, dude".