Re: [OT]: is this crap? -> wininformant headline "Most InsecureOS? Yep, It's Linux"
At 01:29 PM 11/28/02 -0600, Texoma Sales wrote:
>www.WinGows.com
>
>Bullet Proof Windows 9x configuration to be available Feb. 2003.
>
>RAM DRIVE - CDROM Only .... Not as good as Knoppix... Could put Norton and
>McAfee in trouble.
>
>I know this a Linux form but, since the question of MS security arises I
>wanted to put in my 1/2 cents worth. No HD Access means no Security
>Problems. Correct?
Ya, who needs an 80GB hard disk when you can have a 1/4G RAM disk? Sounds
handy -- downloaded files can be written to floppies! Seems like plenty of
room to install a worm on a RAM disk.
It's nice that Paul Thurrott could expose linux for what it is! As always,
Paul's unbiased, peer-reviewed, reference-cited, in depth analysis can
leave no doubt. How could we have been so misled?!? ;)
It's kind of fun reading his other articles, too.
Here's bacially the same info as described by another author.
http://www.ntsecurity.net/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=26037
They failed to see the obvious conclusion that Paul found???
--
Bill Moseley
mailto:moseley@hank.org
Reply to: