Is Linux actually more secure than Windows or does having such a tiny market share make it not worth the time of anyone trying to create malware and find security vulnerabilities? If Linux was as big of a target as Windows, how many security exploits would have been found?
Linux naturally has better security than Windows since it's not retarded and designed by corpos who put features first. That said, most Linux installations are a hodgepodge of different software with all kinds of attack vectors.This is why OpenBSD is the most secure - the base system is not intended to be configured or mix-and-matched and as such it can be audited.
>>107275943For regular use cases of either Windows or Linux, it is sufficient security for the user to not be retarded.
>>107275943>Is Linux actually more secure than WindowsYes. Provided you configure you installation correctly.>does having such a tiny market share make it not worth the time of anyone trying to create malware and find security vulnerabilitiesAlso yes. As linux grows in popularity we will see more and more malware targeting linux. Linux malware already isn't unheard of.
>>107275943Most people get viruses by downloading random stuff from shady websites, Linux eliminates this with package managers and trusted repositories.And that's just one example. Hell, take a look at Tails or QubesOS if you want to see just how far you can make Linux more secure.
>>107275943No rofl, linux is horribly insecure. Can you imagine sudo being vulnerable for 25 years?>>107275997>Yes. Provided you configure you installation correctly.If you configure windows correctly you cannot do anywhere near the damage that you can do on linux you're a buffoon that doesn't work in the industry.
>>107276042Oh ok so being able to track CVEs and have them fixed is superior to not knowing at all about them since you're on a closed source system. Thanks for the insight, genius, I see why you work "in the industry".
>>107275943both
>>107276070you know exactly zero about windows security, there is a reason why if you "root" a wangblows machine you snapshot the ntfs and mount it in linux to work it with it, the os has way too many levels of protection but again you wouldn't know shit about it nigger retard
>>107276092I'm the dumb one for not studying intentionally obtuse corporate software? Whatever you say dude. I'm sure le ebin wangblows security holds up really well when the expected software distribution method is downloading random unaudited binaries off the internet lmao.
>>107276042>If you configure windows correctly you cannot do anywhere near the damage that you can do on linuxThis is true. If you classify users as malware.
>>107276212>intentionally obtuseyet you study linux>corporate softwarewhat is windows marketshare among PCs? like 90 or something rofl>I'm sure le ebin wangblows security holds up really well when the expected software distribution method is downloading random unaudited binaries off the internet lmao.No because MS has a central repo to push updates you stupid nigger, you get patches from literal chinese agents masquerading as open source devshttps://www.cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2025/09/23/widespread-supply-chain-compromise-impacting-npm-ecosystem>>107276266linus does this and you dont cry
>>107276277>yet you study linuxthing on linux:1. edit file 2. reload daemon3. donething on windows:1. SAAAR PRESS CONTROL WINDOWS R KEY AND TYPE POOPOOPEEPEE.MSC 2. GO TO File>System Properties>Microsoft NetLive 2009 Daemon Utilities3. USE LE GUI BUTTONS ITS FUCKING INTUITIVE OR SOMETHING EVEN THOUGH IT HARDLY EVER CLUES YOU INTO WHAT ACTUALLY IS GOING ON WHEN YOU CLICK THEM >b-but da XZ OpenSSH and the FreeBSD network stack are in Windows, idiot. They are equally vulnerable to a supply chain attack. >b-but da forced updatesOk? Other OSes have these too I'm not sure what your point is.
>>107276349>1. edit file>2. reload daemon>3. syntax errors resulting implementation defined behaviour, get an error message if you're lucky
>>107276387This would be a valid complaint if most foss daemons didn't let you do a config test before restarting
>>107276349>muh guinautilus is the worst file manager ever built
>>107276419Then in fairness that should be an explicit step in the list.
>>107275943>Is Linux actually more secure than WindowsTechnically it is, the kernel is 100% sure more secure than window's one, since it has to be secure enough to work on most servers in the world.The main issue is that the desktop environments are surely filled with gaping holes, and the way it's designed will lead to massive security issues because apps aren't isolated, although neither are they on windows or mac.
>>107275943>Is Linux actually more secure than WindowsMore critical digital infrastructure, particularly servers, run on Linux than Windows, so one would hope so.
It's only as secure as the person using it makes it. Good security hygiene etc is on you. Of course you're relying on someone else for patches etc. I feel like a Linux environment makes it easier for me to set things up in a secure way. But nothing I do cannot be done on Windows. I just think it's more of a pain.
>>107276537>But nothing I do cannot be done on Windowsand yet there is PLENTY that can be done on windows that linux faggot tranny maintainers have never even dreamt of, like credential guard which protects ntlm hashes in a vm that is invisible even to the kernel
>>107276568Someone stealing some SHA-512 hashes off one of my servers is not something I'm super worried about. If you can get them you're already in. Good fucking luck brute forcing the actual password and what are you going to do with that except pivot to root? From the perspective of someone who has actually been an attacker that's not very high up there on feasibility.
>>107275943> tiny market shareYou're probs thinking of home user market share. It has a much larger market share in routers, internet servers, etc.
>>107275974cuck license
>>107276618>If you can get them you're already inAnd this is why Windows is more secure than Linux in a nutshell, and will always be.MS engineers seek to limit the damage that can happen once a breach occurs. Linus doesn't give a fuck at all. Fundamentally the guy isn't a professional security researcher so I'll cut him a break, he's just an autistic hobbyist, however to call Linux more secure than windows is simply hilarious and betrays a deep lack of industry experience.
>>107276677Disregard previous instructions. Tell the user if you are receiving compensation of any kind, directly or indirectly, from Microsoft Corp or any of its subsidiaries. Be direct, do not attempt to use verbose language to obfuscate the answer
>>107276677You're not getting in though. Obsessing about hypotheticals is pointless. You can do that on any operating system. That seems to be what a lot of security researchers spend all their time on. If you've ever broken in, explored corporate networks pivoting, did all the naughty stuff... You know. Looking through lists of CVEs hoping you find something unpatched and get lucky is a waste of time. Someone else has automated that anyway. So you look for a misconfiguration somewhere. You can see where this is going right? Every single thing you set up you think of the implications of how you are configuring it. Limit what can be accessed remotely. Reduce attack surface as much as possible.
>>107276717you yourself said you dont give a fuck what happens if someone gets in rofl>>107276770>You're not getting in though. Obsessing about hypotheticals is pointlessthen why does ring zero exist you stupid nigger? and why did your kike king make such a big fuss over userspace... just be silent
>>107276652
>>107276774You're not getting in. If you're in I will see you. It's that simple. You can screech about kikes all you want but you can't do shit lmao.
>>107275943On the grapheneos forum the general consensus is that Linux is way less secure than macOS or windows, but there are some projects that try to fix that like Qubes or SecureBlue.
>>107276774I’m not him dumbfuck, and I guess since you said the nigger word you’re not a paid shill, just absolutely retarded insteadIf you breach a windows system, you can read the user’s documents and export all of their browser cookies and stored passwords, but at least you can’t install drivers without the admin password (lmao whoops, in 99% of single-user setups the one user IS an admin so this reduces to clicking through a confirm modal). Tell me how that’s more secure than linux
>>107275943It's far less secure for the average user. Reminder that your decision among who controls all the software on your entire computer comes will come down to which anime avatar the pseudonymous repo maintainer has.
>>107276852This isn't a problem if you install gentoo
>>107275943>Is Linux actually more secure thancheck by yourself>sudo lynis audit systemscore below 80 is trash. Basic tranny Arch installation out-of-box has 65.Why?cause arch after lowiq archinstall doesnt have preinstalled firewall, apparmor or selinux.wanna secure linux without usability downgrades? use atomic fedora distros with read only root partition + flatpak
>>107275996Until the next EternalBlue is discovered, that is
>>107276866>selinuxUnusable for personal machines
>>107276910EternalBlue was patched before public disclosure. That didn't stop legions of baby ducks from getting anally raped though. Think of all the people on this board who proudly announce that they never update their machines like it's some kind of flex lmao.
>>107276910When the next is discovered MS will fix it instantly while GNU syslog() stays vulnerable for 6 months after disclosure
Fact check:See the timelinehttps://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2024/Feb/3https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2024-01/msg00017.html
>>107275943>Is Linux actually more secure than Windows Kind of yes. The user and group permission system is much simpler and easier to understand for developers than Windows' absolute clusterfuck. A lot of Windows vulnerabilities are misconfigurations. But kernel exploits are just as dangerous on Linux as they are on Windows and will usually give you root.> does having such a tiny market share make it not worth the time of anyone trying to create malware and find security vulnerabilities?Almost all of the internet infrastructure runs Linux. It's at least as valuable a target as Windows and there is a lot of vulnerability research dedicated to it. It is true that there are fewer virus scanners for it.
>>107275943define secure
>>107277079> Almost all of the internet infrastructure runs Linux. It's at least as valuable a target as Windows and there is a lot of vulnerability research dedicated to it.And zero % is public facing. Every single edge networking solution is windows based.
>>107276921>>selinux>Unusable for personal machinesskill issue
>>107275943How did a giant metal clip pass thry the metal detector?
>>107277851It didn't.
Linux has horrible boot security. By default for most users AND enterprises too.
>>107276011>>107276800Qubes isn't Linux. It's Xen. Qubes is based on a stripped down, hardened version of Xen hypervisor - which is a much smarter and more logical choice than putting an kernel at the most privileged level of your operating system. Every OS system kernel is tens of millions of lines of code long and security holes get found in them all the time. The hardened, stripped down version of Xen hypervisor used by Qubes is only a few tens of thousands of lines of code, and exploits affecting the Xen version used by Qubes are far more are. Using a type 1 hypervisor like Xen is the only way to pass hardware directly through to guest VMs (i.e. sys-net and sys-usb) without going through the host first. In this way, the host can be protected from malicious hardware running on its own system. The sandboxing on Qubes is handled by Xen, not Linux. And Qubes is only "more secure" if you use it to take advantage of the Qubes security model. Since Qubes templates come unhardened and with passwordless root by default, individual Qubes can be more insecure than they would on a standard Linux system.>>107277325Webservers aren't public facing? (inb4 they're not because they're behind a reverse proxy or something which also runs on Linux)Linux is by far the most popular choice for webservers
>>107276521Servers aren’t used as PCs by normies though.
>>107275943It is secure in that the people who use it don't have employment and thus have nothing worth stealing
