Linux is Less Secure

While discussing about :penguin:I heard that this Linux is less secure than Windows 🪟 and Mac

https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/linux.html
Is it completely true ??
Or is this fake news broadcasted on the Internet by people who have some kind of propaganda ??
Although I agree that nothing is 100 % secure in this Technology world and vulnerabilities exist on Linux too .

1 Like

Fake, Fud, what ever you want to call it. Linux is much more secure than Windows ever thought of being.
All Systems that are connected to the internet are at risk, But linux is much better than most. and it’s file system is more secure. Linux security

In the end alot depends on the op. human error is often the weakest link in any OS.

5 Likes

This is a very complex topic and can hardly be answered in a yes or no fashion.

The cited article clearly compares apples to oranges, but still manages to give some valuable insight and is actually partly right.

It focusses on a very specific aspect of security: The possibility of executing malicious code with elevated privileges and how this is prevented to a certain degree in ChromeOS, MacOS and Windows.

Still, it is based on the rather naive assumption that the corporations behind the different systems, Google, Apple and Microsoft have only your best interest at heart and are doing their best to defend you against the mob of evil hackers in the wild world.

If you agree with this premise, then Linux is probably not the right choice for you.

to be continued

5 Likes

@Mina
I don’t agree with this article .
I would like to say that :penguin: is much secure than Windows and MacOS .

The fundamental difference between Linux and the “commercial” OS’s is that they are based on usage by a single computer system while Linux and it’s type of OS’s are based on networking multiple computers together.
The ability of MS and Mac to network is an add-on feature and not in their core codes.
ANY system can be hacked, IF you’re willing to spend the time, effort, and coin to get it done.
Linux type systems makes that effort noticeably more expensive than the “commercial” systems.

3 Likes

continued from above

In the times of Windows 95/98, the general statement, Linux is more secure was pretty much true.

Nowadays, the situation is a bit different: General statements as the one above or the title of the article don’t make any sense without looking at different use cases and specific aspects of IT-security, namely privacy.

As @kc1di already pointed out, 90% of IT-security is in front of the computer, not inside.

As a general rule, we can still say that the Open Source approach to software is far better at preventing certain kinds of threats, namely introduction of backdoors by governments and institutions, than the security by obscurity approach of closed source systems.

Still, the article puts the finger in an open wound: Security by design is an approach which is wildly despised by the old guard of kernel developers around Linus Torvalds. It is my personal opinion that this is an approach which cannot be upheld much longer. The biggest part of world’s critical IT-infrastructure is currently running on Linux and many design choices made in the early days, when the goal was to provide the general public with a truly free alternative to the commercial UNIX implementations, are now, decades later, becoming liabilities.

When it comes to set up a corporate IT-infrastructure, Linux would still be the system of my choice, but I would make very sure to have a well-paid and capable sysadmin with plenty of time and resources.

On the other hand, I think it is the moment to seriously re-examine the paradigms of the Linux kernel development, even if it means saying farewell to the valiant heroes of the past.

4 Likes

Nothing is secure if you don’t know how to use it or what is happening with it. Linux is just kernel’s upstream. There are many forks of it used by different distros. The security depends on various factors like distro, desktop-environment, apps you use, firewall rules, etc. Expecting security out of the box wouldn’t make sense, but at least there are distros that do not add proprietary apps or enable some features by default. The user is responsible for what and how they install or use. One big advantage of Linux is its permissions.

1 Like

We are talking of pc linux here. I assume hackers are not interested in this.

3 Likes