Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux

[srobert]

An extract:

"Microsoft Corp. is preparing a major PR assault over Windows' perceived security failings in which it will criticize Linux for taking too long to fix bugs, we have learned."

Link to the whole article (http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/11/11/HNmsassault_1.html)

Talk about diverting attention away from it's own problems. Cheap shot. ^_^

Looks like this is becoming common practice for microsoft:

Link to another article (http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/other/0,39020682,39117796,00.htm)

Quote from that second article:

"What a brilliant PR move -- something to distract the media from the latest Windows-based virus ... Microsoft has decided to point the finger elsewhere"

Sorry about the M$ bashing. It's just that I find this new trend... shamefull.

[XnavxeMiyyep]

This is shameful, even by Microsoft's standards. They're blatantly attacking an OS that is used by 1% of the market.

[G4scott]

Don't we just love Microsoft? This is truly pathetic... I hope it turns around to bite them in the ass... I mean, Linux doesn't even really sell itself because it's secure. it sells itself because it's open source. Security is good with Linux, but I don't expect the best. If a product is advertised as secure, though, it better well be secure, or there'll be hell to pay...

[jxyama]

well, this is in the same line of tactics as offering rewards for virus writers. i think the money could be better used to plug up holes so it will be less susceptible to virus to begin with...

[idea_hamster]

Originally posted by srobert
"Microsoft Corp. is preparing a major PR assault over Windows' perceived security failings....
Um, what exactly do they mean by "perceived"? That sounds like they've been blamed for something that's not true.

Maybe they should take their blood money in their reward slush fund and this big fat check that they're going to write to some slick Madison Ave. spin agency and spend it on some programmers' overtime pay.

From Balmer
"In the first 150 days after the release of Windows 2000," he said, "there were 17 critical vulnerabilities. For Windows Server 2003, there were four. For Red Hat Linux 6, they were five to ten times higher."
This is the perfect example of the muddled thinking at MS: this statement sounds good at first, but on close examination is totally ambiguous. Isn't Red Hat up to Version 9? Five to ten times higher than what -- 17? 4? And the difference between 5x and 10x is double -- a huge difference. If MS can't figure out whether Red Hat 6 had 85 flaws or 170, maybe they should go back to using an abacus.:rolleyes:

[jxyama]

while on this topic... /. had an interesting post regarding how M$ has actually been suffering from all the security/virus flaws. instead of renewing contracts or finishing up new deals, M$ sales have been dealing with supporting and fixing those damages...

one of the posts there noted how M$ is now spending more and more money trying to maintain its monopoly - endless dark pit, sucking money down, if you ask me...

[1macker1]

They are not attacking, just going to release truthful information. When MS has security hole, the world wants to here, why shouldnt this be the case for all OS.

[Counterfit]

Because they're spending mucho dinero trying to catch the virus writers, and basically talk **** about Linux, when it would be better spent fixing the massive security holes that cripple far too many systems.

By comparison, while Mac OS X doesn't have a built-in firewall, at least it arrives on your computer with all unnecessary Internet ports closed. Well, he's half right there. There is a built-in firewall, I'm not sure how strong it is though...

[5300cs]

Just when I though m$ couldn't get any more childish ... :rolleyes:

[Powerbook G5]

Originally posted by Counterfit
Because they're spending mucho dinero trying to catch the virus writers, and basically talk **** about Linux, when it would be better spent fixing the massive security holes that cripple far too many systems.

Well, he's half right there. There is a built-in firewall, I'm not sure how strong it is though...

I'm not sure how strong it is, either, but I have it on anyway. It's simple enough to do by just going to Sharing and clicking the on button, so I figured why not.

[mangoduck]

They are not attacking, just going to release truthful information. When MS has security hole, the world wants to here, why shouldnt this be the case for all OS.

don't you think it's a tad ironic that ms are the only ones doing this? (that i know of)

so they're pointing at "linux" eh? how do you effectively point one finger at an almost completely decentralized development community? i think gnu/linux are doing quite admirably for the type of projects they are. sure there's bound to be some problems, but let me put it this way: the open source community has done more for this os for nothing than ms has (proportionally) for windows, despite being the money mongers they are. you'd think ms would have the resources to get their shte together by now.

i personally don't think ms has any business pointing at anyone right now. pot and kettle. how about your own lack of security huh? and it's not all passive issues and being lazy, sometimes they deliberately screw things up. how about your attempts to sabotage webstandards? how about your attempts to shove everyone out of every market you can? what about the scads of immoral business practices i'm forgetting? just because it makes you money and makes you "successful" doesn't make it good.

[5300cs]

Far being it from me to criticise UNIX or Linux, but security can be diminished with an idiot at the helm. Granted windows is in itself not a secure OS, UNIX & Linux can become so when the user turns things on/off (telnet, ftp) or chooses a trivial password.

From long articles I've read, NT is a hacked version of VMS, which was originally a multi-user system (like UNIX, etc.) Unfortunately m$ had it hacked into a single-user system thus negating the benefits of a multi-user system.

Here's a link to a really good article on why m$ is bad.


linky:
looooong read, but good (http://www.euronet.nl/users/frankvw/IhateMS.html)

[Counterfit]

Man, that is long! After about 20 minutes, I'm less than 1/4 of the way through!

[jxyama]

Originally posted by 1macker1
They are not attacking, just going to release truthful information. When MS has security hole, the world wants to here, why shouldnt this be the case for all OS.

it's "truthful" in a very, very limited way. they sponsored the study, focused generally on a very narrow section of linux and generally exaggerated the results.

when M$ has security holes, the world wants to hear because the damage they cause are very severe - thanks to both widespread use of windows and relatively severe damages those holes can cause considering how easy they are to take advantage of.

like mangoduck said, microsoft has absolutely no business "advertizing" other OS's faults. they need to concentrate on fixing their own problems.