Windows
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
/g/ why is Windows more secure than Linux?
>>54437456
Norton.
/thread
Professional developers secure it for their job as opposed to unpaid neets in their basement securing it when they feel like it if they can even manage to figure out how
Great post, my colleague. I'm sure the manager will be pleased with your performance!
>>54437472
What about Avast?
>>54437507
Inferior to Norton
>>54437456
It's not, and you're a fucking idiot for thinking that
>>54437472
>>54437514
Wow never seen a Norton shill before. I thought only old people and idiots used that av any more.
>>54437514
On par with McAfee
>>54437537
Yes it is. Shut the fuck up you FREE GNU faggot.
>>54437560
yeah man, in your wet dreams maybe
>>54437456
It isn't.
For example consider offline malware infection:
Windows is highly vulnerable to rootkits. A well written rootkit is not in the database of any antivirus you use. You can harden windows security though. You have to sandbox your explorer and disable autorun to prevent self execution.
On the other hand Linux and OSX or any Unix doesn't let anything to run unless you explicitly given it a permission to execute.
Many people think windows becomes secure upon installing a run of the mill antivirus. What they don't realize is the hard and simple fact that you just cannot install security.
Security is a set of precautionary measures you take to prevent a range of unwanted behaviours such as malware/adware infection, remote execution, identity theft, DoS, keylogging, Spyware and so on
>>54437630
Why not?
Windows has administrative privileges and has antivirus preinstalled.
>>54437654
Even skiddies bypass UAC and sell their scripts. MS devs themselves think UAC is useless in reality
>>54437560
>GNU is Linux
lololoolololololololol
I laughed pretty hard at your post, but this was top happening
>>54437638
>Windows is highly vulnerable to rootkits.
Rootkits infect non-windows computers just fine.
Windows has a greater amount of browser-download, hey-let's-click-the-exe-file-in-this-email malware, but rootkits play ball with any OS
many Linux distros in [current year] still don't support Secure Boot Technology or UEFI which is the only actual anti-rootkit technology
Anyone defending Windows security and vuln protection against a full fledged Linux distro with a user behind it having even a basic understanding of C seriously doesn't do dipdoskidoopdiddlydoop about compoopers.
>>54437456
Because something happened
(something happened).
>>54437857
Funny shit
I change my user-agent from windows to OSX and the malware shitters offer me .dmg files
Because you have to pay $100 to reinstall Linux
>>54437954
Man that's some heavy bait, you trying for big fish on /g/ tonight or something?
>>54437843
Some guy proved recently that linux is by far thee easiest os to break next to mac
das just numbers man more people + hackers = more exploits which equals more fixes
>>54438842
Yeah, maybe a stock linux envrionment.
It's the user that makes the OS with linux, you don't understand because you use junction files and a crippling .net framework communicating XML through SOAP restricting every aspect of use.
Anyone who knows dipskidoobopboopboop about compoopdoop shidooppoop this.
>>54439443
tell yourself whatever you want man
>>54439452
Alright man, enjoy comparing teams of programmers paid unreal salaries to keep up with vulns(Because they have to :^), that's the price of forced compatability :^) ) compared to a framework made in the 90's stock.
That's totally how it works, you tell yourself whatever you want man.
Really kiddo, how much are they paying you?
The kernel has advanced mitigation features and Microsoft employees are required to avoid the use of insecure C functions and constructs. Meanwhile Linus Torvalds considers security people "masturbating monkeys".
>>54437638
>the other hand Linux and OSX or any Unix doesn't let anything to run unless you explicitly given it a permission to execute.
So like Windows then.
>>54437540
Or MAYBE it was bait just like OP
>people actually use anti viruses
really?
>>54437560
>he doesn't like freedom
Commie!!
>>54437857
What linux distros dont support UEFI?
