2 OS?

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by news, Jun 25, 2004.

  1. news

    news Guest

    What OS is most secure? Linux? But most softwares that use Windows does not
    work for Linux i guess?!

    If i want a very secure internet access could i install both OS on my pc and
    let Linux work outwards? Could i then run softwares on the Windows platform
    but access internet through Linux?


    I am new on this if you did not know :)

    Thanks
    news, Jun 25, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. One that is NOT connected to a LAN or the Internet.

    Dave





    "news" <> wrote in message news:GC0Dc.96936$...
    | What OS is most secure? Linux? But most softwares that use Windows does not
    | work for Linux i guess?!
    |
    | If i want a very secure internet access could i install both OS on my pc and
    | let Linux work outwards? Could i then run softwares on the Windows platform
    | but access internet through Linux?
    |
    |
    | I am new on this if you did not know :)
    |
    | Thanks
    |
    |
    David H. Lipman, Jun 25, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. news

    Bit Twister Guest

    On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:16:22 GMT, news wrote:
    > What OS is most secure? Linux?


    It is much safer that doze.

    > But most softwares that use Windows does not
    > work for Linux i guess?!


    Yes pretty much. Otherwise Bill would be sueing even more linux vendors.

    >
    > If i want a very secure internet access could i install both OS on my pc and
    > let Linux work outwards?


    Hmmm, look at that statement. You cannot load both OSs and run both at
    the same time unless you get vmware. Then you cannot route doze
    traffic through linux.

    > Could i then run softwares on the Windows platform
    > but access internet through Linux?


    Not on what you have explained so far.

    You can take another box and load linux and two nics and have it do
    Network Address Translation (NAT) and masquerade your doze box behind
    it and provide a firewall.

    You might look at the discriptions at http://www.distrowatch.com
    Bit Twister, Jun 25, 2004
    #3
  4. news

    johns Guest

    Linux is easier to hack than Windows. There is simply
    not enough installs for certain types of hacks to propagate
    efficiently. Worse .. Linux ( Redhat ) .. bleh! I'd rather
    have the virus. Much less destructive. Typically in my
    test labs, Linux will only stay up about a month, and
    then it takes down the entire drive. It is just a toy, and
    the hype is kid stuff.

    johns
    johns, Jun 26, 2004
    #4
  5. news

    Dazz Guest

    On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:16:22 GMT, "news" <> wrote:

    >What OS is most secure? Linux? But most softwares that use Windows does not
    >work for Linux i guess?!


    No OS is completely secure (and this includes Linux, Windows, BSD etc
    etc).

    While it could be argued that some are more "secure" out of the box,
    you have to take into account a number of different factors where the
    security of a system can be compromised.

    These factors can include the Operating System itself,
    software/applications and even the user.

    Security isn't simply something that "happens" - it takes time,
    effort, knowledge and is something that is ongoing.

    >If i want a very secure internet access could i install both OS on my pc and
    >let Linux work outwards? Could i then run softwares on the Windows platform
    >but access internet through Linux?


    Although you can have both Operating Systems running using emulation
    software such as VMware, this still wouldn't achieve any increase in
    security until you know how to secure your system.

    Instead, what you should do is learn how to secure the OS you like to
    use. Keep your system up to date with the latest security patches (OS
    and software), keep an eye out for any new vulnerabilities affecting
    your OS and software, use anti-virus software and keep it up to date,
    use a firewall and learn how to properly configure it, but most of
    all, use safe computing practises.

    There's plenty of information available on the internet about
    security, and a google search will do wonders.

    >I am new on this if you did not know :)
    >
    >Thanks


    Hope this helps.

    Dazz
    Dazz, Jun 26, 2004
    #5
  6. In article <cbit8c$2mi2$>, says...
    > Linux is easier to hack than Windows. There is simply
    > not enough installs for certain types of hacks to propagate
    > efficiently. Worse .. Linux ( Redhat ) .. bleh! I'd rather
    > have the virus. Much less destructive. Typically in my
    > test labs, Linux will only stay up about a month, and
    > then it takes down the entire drive. It is just a toy, and
    > the hype is kid stuff.
    >
    > johns
    >
    >
    >



    then you're an idiot.

    my home linux file server has a 267 day uptime so far.




    --
    Colonel Flagg
    http://www.internetwarzone.org/

    Privacy at a click:
    http://www.cotse.net

    Q: How many Bill Gates does it take to change a lightbulb?
    A: None, he just defines Darkness? as the new industry standard..."

    "...I see stupid people."
    Colonel Flagg, Jun 26, 2004
    #6
  7. news

    Dazz Guest

    On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:14:44 -0700, "johns" <>
    wrote:

    >Linux is easier to hack than Windows. There is simply
    >not enough installs for certain types of hacks to propagate
    >efficiently. Worse .. Linux ( Redhat ) .. bleh! I'd rather
    >have the virus. Much less destructive. Typically in my
    >test labs, Linux will only stay up about a month, and
    >then it takes down the entire drive. It is just a toy, and
    >the hype is kid stuff.


    Bwahahahahahahahaha.

    This is just *too* damn funny.

    Ahh, if only it was based on some form of reality, instead of the
    opinion of a moron who obviously smokes too much drugs and who just
    doesn't have *any* clue about Linux or Windows.

    Better luck next time, dickhead. :)

    Dazz

    >johns
    >
    Dazz, Jun 26, 2004
    #7
  8. news

    Leythos Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > my home linux file server has a 267 day uptime so far.


    I have Windows 2000 servers with more time than that - Up time means
    nothing on a properly configured system.



    --
    --

    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
    Leythos, Jun 26, 2004
    #8
  9. news

    Martin Guest

    Leythos wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    >
    >>my home linux file server has a 267 day uptime so far.

    >
    >
    > I have Windows 2000 servers with more time than that - Up time means
    > nothing on a properly configured system.


    Don't you believe in installing security patches then?

    >
    >
    >
    Martin, Jun 26, 2004
    #9
  10. news

    Leythos Guest

    In article <cbjmgq$73r$>,
    says...
    > Leythos wrote:
    > > In article <>,
    > > says...
    > >
    > >>my home linux file server has a 267 day uptime so far.

    > >
    > >
    > > I have Windows 2000 servers with more time than that - Up time means
    > > nothing on a properly configured system.

    >
    > Don't you believe in installing security patches then?


    Sure do, but not every patch is needed for every installation. In some
    secured areas you don't need every security patch. It would be like
    locking a box contained in a vault that has only one key and you have
    the key at all times.

    There are many reasons to install patches, and many reasons to not
    install them - it all depends on your environment.

    I can remember one NT 4 install that ran on SP3 for almost 3 years
    before we upgraded to SP6a, it was only due to a change in the control
    system that required 6a that we installed it (which required a reboot).

    --
    --

    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
    Leythos, Jun 26, 2004
    #10
  11. In article <>,
    says...
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > > my home linux file server has a 267 day uptime so far.

    >
    > I have Windows 2000 servers with more time than that - Up time means
    > nothing on a properly configured system.
    >
    >
    >
    >




    what means "something" then? if it's up 99.9% of the times, works
    without issue, what more can you ask for?

    this particular linux box works as a file server, streaming media server
    for the entire house LAN, print server... I use it occasionally with
    xwindows and KDE to setup new desktop apps for documentation writing,
    not to mention a test box for apache, php, mysql & other stuff.




    --
    Colonel Flagg
    http://www.internetwarzone.org/

    Privacy at a click:
    http://www.cotse.net

    Q: How many Bill Gates does it take to change a lightbulb?
    A: None, he just defines Darkness? as the new industry standard..."

    "...I see stupid people."
    Colonel Flagg, Jun 26, 2004
    #11
  12. news

    Leythos Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > what means "something" then? if it's up 99.9% of the times, works
    > without issue, what more can you ask for?
    >
    > this particular linux box works as a file server, streaming media server
    > for the entire house LAN, print server... I use it occasionally with
    > xwindows and KDE to setup new desktop apps for documentation writing,
    > not to mention a test box for apache, php, mysql & other stuff.


    Ah, good question - what means something is the up-time for a server
    that does more than just sit there and look pretty. The NT 4 server in
    question was running a process control system and acting as the DC for a
    production plant that produced a food item 24/7 all year long - 3 years
    of continuous up time sounds pretty stable to me.

    I have had Windows 2000 servers, acting as DC's with more than a years
    up-time that were only rebooted due to SP installs. I've also had an AIX
    box with 4 years of up time, but then it also went through several
    months of down-every-night problems. Also have SQL 2000 servers with
    more than a year of up-time before rebooting to apply SP's...

    It's all in how you configure it and how well the hardware holds out.

    The latest problem I've had was a Windows 2000 box that's been running
    for almost 7 months - the Motherboard Died, but W2K had been up the
    entire time before that.

    --
    --

    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
    Leythos, Jun 27, 2004
    #12
  13. news

    Mimic Guest

    "news" <> wrote in message
    news:GC0Dc.96936$...
    > What OS is most secure? Linux? But most softwares that use Windows does

    not
    > work for Linux i guess?!
    >
    > If i want a very secure internet access could i install both OS on my pc

    and
    > let Linux work outwards? Could i then run softwares on the Windows

    platform
    > but access internet through Linux?
    >
    >
    > I am new on this if you did not know :)
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    >


    Yes "tracker" you can.
    You can either run a dual boot system as I do
    and have the option of booting into windows or linux
    or you can run linux and then run your windows
    programs through a windows emulator such as WINE.

    --
    Mimic

    Social Engineering - Because theres no patch for human stupidity.
    ZGF0YWZsZXhAY2FubmFiaXNtYWlsLmNvbQ== ( www.hidemyemail.net )
    "Without knowledge you have fear. With fear you create your own nightmares."
    "He who controls Google, controls the world".
    Mimic, Jun 28, 2004
    #13
  14. news

    Mimic Guest

    "Dazz" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > Dazz
    >


    wb Dazz0

    --
    Mimic

    Social Engineering - Because theres no patch for human stupidity.
    ZGF0YWZsZXhAY2FubmFiaXNtYWlsLmNvbQ== ( www.hidemyemail.net )
    "Without knowledge you have fear. With fear you create your own nightmares."
    "He who controls Google, controls the world".
    Mimic, Jun 28, 2004
    #14
  15. news

    Al Smith Guest

    > What OS is most secure? Linux? But most softwares that use Windows does not
    > work for Linux i guess?!
    >
    > If i want a very secure internet access could i install both OS on my pc and
    > let Linux work outwards? Could i then run softwares on the Windows platform
    > but access internet through Linux?
    >
    >
    > I am new on this if you did not know :)
    >
    > Thanks


    Have at least two hard drives on your computer. Install Windows to
    your C, or boot, drive. Install Linux (I suggest Mandrake) to your
    second hard drive, and the Linux boot loader, LILO, will
    automatically make available a menu at every boot giving you the
    choice to boot into either Linux or Windows. It defaults to Linux,
    but can be changed to default to Windows. Use Linux to surf the
    Web, and Windows for your serious work. This will indeed protect
    you from almost all the dangers of the Internet.
    Al Smith, Jun 29, 2004
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page