When I first started using loonix I got the impression from people that it was basically an invulnurable OS. Now, I understand that it varies from distro to distro but from what I gathered the security of linux systems is way overblown.Realistically, how serious are the security issues really? I can see the benefit of atomic distros in this regard. I see secureblue shlled a lot lately.
>>107115663Everyone can tell the anti-Linux spam isn't organic. It will only backfire.
>>107115663what makes you think the seriousness of security issues are a metric?
>>107115663It was security through obscurity, but now that many normies are moving to Linux because of Microsoft's shit, there's an interest in developing malware for Loonix.
use case for security?
Do people even bother making malware to target Linux desktops? They're like 1% of the market.Linux servers I would understand.
>>107116885>It wasstill is, do you really think people are moving in hordes to loonix? most normies dont even know it exists, and most gaymers i know would never touch it, the cattle dont want to learn, they will never trade their convenience.
>>107116972Normies aren't moving to Linux they just installing it on their old PCs in addition to using Windows 11 on their new ones
>>107115663The most "secure" OS is one that's the most locked down, walled garden type, so that it's basically impossible to install unverified/third party software on it. But that's no fun, is it? Linux security on its own is a bit overblown. Overall, I'd say it's slightly more secure than Windows, because of the principle of running everything with minimum privileges, whereas on Windows it's common to run everything with admin privileges.>>107116885Linux is open source, and it's what's used by most servers around the world, so the incentive to find kernel-level vulnerabilities is always there. Desktop Linux and server Linux are both fundamentally the same, but in theory, Desktop Linux would be easier to exploit because the extra packages give it a larger potential attack surface, and it's easier to socially engineer its retarded users into executing malware as root.
GNU/Linux is inherently insecure. Distros like secureblue and qubesos can mitigate that a bit if configured correctly. Pretty much every other distro isn't secure at all. Also x86 platforms don't really have any effective security features. TPM and secureboot are a joke compared to the security features some modern ARM platforms have.
Didn't China have root access to every linux OS for like 3 years?
>>107115663the security of linux amounts to: "don't be a fucking retard"in practice it works far better than windows
