[nfbcs] security, linux vs Windows

Thu May 22 19:13:29 UTC 2014

I mostly agree with John, but wanted to point out that the recent
"heartbleed" vulnerability was open source.

One problem with heartbleed is the same is with Vinux and Sonar.  Too
few people paying attention to the product.  Apathetic security and
code reviews, and tada, bugs!

Open source has a lot of potential to be secure because many eyes
*can* be on the source code.  But, for that to be successful, may eyes
*must* be on the source code.

I think the idea that windows viruses have captured all the attention
is correct.  I also don't worry too much about that changing, as long
as two things are true...

1) Windows still captures most of the user's market share.

2) You, the user who decides not to use windows, are not concerned
that you personally are vulnerable to attack.  i.e. is someone trying
to break into your bank account, or are people just trying to break
into as many bank accounts as possible.

Jim

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:03:36PM -0500, John Heim via nfbcs wrote:
> Tyler, you can't just dismiss the point about most viruses being written for
> Windows. You sy you don't believe that matters? Why the heck not? As a
> practical point, it would make sense for someone to switch to linux just to
> avoid the vast majority of viruses.
> 
> Your point about Windows coming with a firewall isafairly minor point. First
> of all, "easier to make secure" and "more secure" aren't the same thing.
> Secondly, just having a firewall at installation isn't enough to make
> Windows easier to secure than linux. Installing a firewall isn't the hard
> part, configuring it is. It takes about 2 seconds to install a firewall and
> that alone isn't a  significant difference. It's like saying a Ford is a
> better car than a Rolls Royce because it's easier to change the tires. Well,
> that may be a point in favor of Ford but not a significant one.
> 
> Open source software has, over all, been far less vulnerable to exploits
> than  proprietary. Apache is far more secure than IIS, for example.   In
> fact, unlike some of the exploits that were discovered in Windows systems,
> including all the third party software for Windows, the damage done by that
> openssl exploit was trivial. It was a pain for all of us to have to change
> our passwords but very little actual damage was done. Equivalent exploits in
> Windows programs have caused far more damage. In a way, this is the flip
> side of the point about viruses. The reason the openssl bug was so important
> was that openssl is used everywhere. If so many servers weren't running
> linux, it wouldn't have mattered so much. It's amazing how little damage was
> done and that's because the good guys discovered it before the bad guys. And
> the only reason they were able to do that is because it's open source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 05/22/14 11:49, Littlefield, Tyler via nfbcs wrote:
> >Hello:
> >My experiences come from watching the Vinux list a while back, though this
> >may just be the point of view of some of the more radical vinux folks. I
> >know a lot of people switch for various reasons, but for a long time, at
> >least in the Vinux world a lot of people were switching over for some
> >vague hope of higher security. This actually brings up a fun topic though,
> >so I'm going to run with it, because I'm really curious what other
> >people's thoughts are.
> >
> >I do not believe it really depends on how many viruses are written for
> >what OS when you talk about security in general. My view of security is a
> >system that is provided to the end-user with a very minimal attack
> >surface. Obviously the only way to truly avoid that attack surface is to
> >just unplug the system in question. So, lets look at this scenario. Many
> >unix systems come with nothing at all enabled, which is great. Others come
> >with stuff like Portmap for RPC, nfs and etc already enabled. Windows also
> >comes with services enabled.
> >
> >The bonus points I'll give to Windows is they have a firewall, with a
> >default slightly restrictive policy enabled that helps with some of these
> >issues, where as any installation of Ubuntu or even Debian does not have a
> >default iptables ruleset to prevent access to these attack vectors.
> >
> >Finally, Windows has pretty much kept up in terms of technologies like
> >ASLR, etc. It might be easier to say that one system is by default more
> >secure than another, but in this case I think it is -really- important to
> >specify which Linux or even Unix derivative we are speaking of here. I
> >also believe that with work, any system can be secured; out of the box
> >security is hardly a viable options for end-user systems.
> >
> >Finally, I want to touch on the open source comment you gave, because I
> >find that really interesting. I understand the ideas of open source vs
> >closed source to a point, but I would argue that having millions of people
> >staring at the code for a long time doesn't necessarily mean more secure
> >code. Case and point: the most recent Open SSL heartbleed bug, which had
> >apparently existed since late 2011. while I believe there is a greater
> >chance of finding these vulnorabilities, the issue is going to be hampered
> >by the vast amount of code that libraries like Open SSL contain. I would
> >also argue that having people stare at the code doesn't even mean that
> >those people are going to be compitant in terms of security. Really truly
> >detecting security problems through a huge codebase requires people who
> >know about security to fully audit the code, as is the current case with
> >the Open BSD fork of Open SSL, as well as projects like Truecrypt, etc.
> >
> >On 5/22/2014 11:51 AM, John Heim via nfbcs wrote:
> >>I doubt the vinux or sonar developers ever put any thought into why
> >>people might want to try linux. Why would they care if people are trying
> >>it because they think it will help them get a job in IT or because they
> >>think it's more secure?
> >>
> >>Your experience with people trying linux is certainly far different from
> >>mine. I don't know anybody who has tried it because they think it's more
> >>secure. Everybody I know who has tried it has done so because they are
> >>are already in systems admin and want to find out about linux.
> >>
> >>PS: I kind of object to your saying linux is not a more secure operating
> >>system as if that's an established fact. That's a huge matter of debate.
> >>There is no denying that the vast majority of viruses are written for
> >>Windows. I know the usual response is that that is only because Windows
> >>is so much more popular than linux. But then you have to get into
> >>theoretical issues about open source versus proprietary software. I side
> >>with the open source people on that issue too.
> >>
> >>
> >>On 05/22/14 10:21, Littlefield, Tyler via nfbcs wrote:
> >>>I don't think the goal was to aid in getting Linux-based employment; I
> >>>think the overall goal was to provide an accessible distro. Generally
> >>>you'll hear lots of rantings and ravings, but most people seemed to
> >>>switch because they think linux is more "secure" by default with no
> >>>bases for that assumption. At least it's generally what I hear and see
> >>>advertised by all the blindness companies that are selling "custom"
> >>>computers with Vinux installed.
> >>>On 5/22/2014 11:15 AM, Jim Barbour via nfbcs wrote:
> >>>>I will point out that this is why I'm not a fan of either distro.  The
> >>>>blindness world isn't big enough to command a lot of attention. The
> >>>>attention we get should be focused on making the distros themselves
> >>>>easier for us to use.  Efforts that try to fork distros, like Ubuntu
> >>>>and arch, into blindness focused ones, like vinux and sonar, do not
> >>>>really help the situation.
> >>>>
> >>>>Further, a blind person isn't going to be able to require that all
> >>>>unix machines they manage run a blindness friendly distro; so this
> >>>>definately doesn't help blind folks get LInux related employment.
> >>>>
> >>>>JIm
> >>>>
> >>>>On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:02:19AM -0400, Littlefield, Tyler via
> >>>>nfbcs wrote:
> >>>>>That's pretty much how it happened. Bill was basically project
> >>>>>lead and took
> >>>>>over everything with some guy from Ubuntu who was back and forth,
> >>>>>think his
> >>>>>name was tony. Or maybe that was the main guy, it's been a while.
> >>>>>Eventually
> >>>>>he just gave it up. My biggest issue is a lot of people call it a
> >>>>>"secure
> >>>>>OS," including commtechusa if you care to look at that site. I was
> >>>>>just
> >>>>>curious what they offered. Last I looked, Vinux recommended not
> >>>>>updating and
> >>>>>they were on an older version of Ubuntu--both not really paths to
> >>>>>security.
> >>>>>The updates was because things would break, but that still means
> >>>>>you're not
> >>>>>all that secure if you ever leave your house and your personal
> >>>>>router.
> >>>>>On 5/22/2014 9:44 AM, John Heim via nfbcs wrote:
> >>>>>>My experience as of about 1 year ago was that sonar was a way more
> >>>>>>polished product than vinux. I've seen a lot of questions about
> >>>>>>vinux like
> >>>>>>when is the new version coming out, why is it still based on
> >>>>>>some old
> >>>>>>version of ubuntu. Like so many open source projects, there was
> >>>>>>probably
> >>>>>>one person, maybe two, driving the project and when they ran out
> >>>>>>of steam,
> >>>>>>the project slowed to a crawl.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I was so impressed with sonar that I put it on my machine at
> >>>>>>home. And I
> >>>>>>put it on what I call my drop dead emergency machine here at
> >>>>>>work. Sonar
> >>>>>>is that solid.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>The one problem I have with sonar is that they are switching
> >>>>>>from basing
> >>>>>>their distro on ubuntu to basing it on arch linux. I will
> >>>>>>probably drop
> >>>>>>sonar once that conversion is complete. I have to stay with a
> >>>>>>debian fork
> >>>>>>because my job is to support debian.  What I'd really like is to
> >>>>>>have
> >>>>>>debian be so accessible that we wouldn't need either sonar or
> >>>>>>vinux. Well,
> >>>>>>one can dream.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>On 05/21/14 20:05, David Andrews via nfbcs wrote:
> >>>>>>>Hi Jim et al:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I have a Windows XP laptop that I am thinking of installing a Linux
> >>>>>>>system on, to play and learn a little.  What are
> >>>>>>>advantages/disadvantages to Sonar versus Vinux?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Dave
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>nfbcs mailing list
> >>>>>>>nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> >>>>>>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> >>>>>>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
> >>>>>>>info for
> >>>>>>>nfbcs:
> >>>>>>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jheim%40math.wisc.edu
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>>nfbcs mailing list
> >>>>>>nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> >>>>>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> >>>>>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
> >>>>>>info for
> >>>>>>nfbcs:
> >>>>>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/tyler%40tysdomain.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>-- 
> >>>>>Take care,
> >>>>>Ty
> >>>>>http://tds-solutions.net
> >>>>>He that will not reason is a bigot; he that cannot reason is a
> >>>>>fool; he that dares not reason is a slave.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>nfbcs mailing list
> >>>>>nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> >>>>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> >>>>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
> >>>>>for nfbcs:
> >>>>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jbar%40barcore.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>nfbcs mailing list
> >>>>nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> >>>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> >>>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
> >>>>for nfbcs:
> >>>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/tyler%40tysdomain.com
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>nfbcs mailing list
> >>nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> >>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> >>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >>nfbcs:
> >>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/tyler%40tysdomain.com
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nfbcs mailing list
> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nfbcs:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jbar%40barcore.com
> 