Originally posted by: coolVariable
That's really just sh*t talking ...
A friend of mine whose company is a really big webhoster/web programming provider has 1 Unix (or Linux?) server and many, many WinNT/2K servers.
He wil never, ever go linux/unix again.
1. It takes almost 2 days to set the *nix server up vs. ~2 hours for a Win server
2. If there is a security hole in win (there are lots - he admits) an update is available within hours and the installation is a matter of minutes vs. if there is a security hole in *nix he never hears about it or it takes a bitch to install the update.
3. If an attacker brings down his server it's a matter of minutes (up to 2 hours) to get the win machines back on line vs. probably reinstalling *nix (2 days) or at least having problems for half a day ...
=> Ask him about *nix and he will rip your throat
1) It takes me about two hours to set up a decent Linux server complete with a firewall and necessary software servers. It takes about two days for Windows to download all its security patches.
2) Do you work for Microsoft? Most security holes that are reported to Microsoft are made public since Microsoft either does not reply or tries to cover it up. A lot of times Windows users have to wait MONTHS before Microsoft provides a patch. Furthermore, most Windows patches are supposed to protect against critical security holes, like that remote exploit that was open by default with Windows XP. It is quite rare for Linux to have a remote root exploit... without root access, there is not a lot of damage you can do.
3) I think you got the two mixed up -- if a cracker gets into Windows, you should reinstall it, since you don't know what he might've done. However, if Linux/Unix is cracked, then the most damage the user can do is delete a server or files associated with it. For example, if you run Apache under the "www" user and group, then the cracker could only do what that user's permissions allowed. No reinstallation would be necessary.
I think you need to get your facts straight...