Vista is still the most secure OS to date.

[iMav]

hmmm ... looks like some members need to reminded about a small incident which wasn't a shock to the MAC fraternity and they said that we are secure as long as hackers dont train their eyes on other OSs and as far as my knowledge goes ... os x is based on bsd aint it :roll:

 

[rocket357]

lets get on topic now. plz change the title to: "vista is a secure OS for home usage"

that'd be more appropriate as all the posts made here claim that its unfair to compare vista to *nix/clones as vista is not a server OS!!! if the title is changed to that then 80% of the posts will hafta be deleted!!!

Indeed.

If you leave the definition unbounded, then those within the bounds of your definition are fair game...hence my posts concerning OpenBSD.

But I do find it interesting that there has been so much controversy over such a hopeless topic. Security is an np-complete problem (for the less mathematically inclined, that means "non-polynomial"...the premise is that to discover a solution takes near infinite effort, but it takes mere seconds to disprove a proposed solution), and as such there really isn't a "secure" OS anywhere. It's all relative to the status of the crowd.

As for DRM, I really didn't want to tread on that subject because it, too, is a hopeless topic. People have opinions, and opinions stink. I've had quite a bit of fun giggling at the *emotionally-driven* crap that some people have posted ("Oh, it upsets me when someone says 'Your OS sucks <insert favorite OS> is the bestest!'"), but honestly I can only handle so much stupidity...opening the DRM can 'O worms was NOT my intent.

You see, people are exceptionally goofy critters...Logic does not drive action, logic simply determines WHAT action will take place. The drive to act comes from emotion, or more accurately, your *belief* about the emotion. (Consider this: you're walking down the street and someone pushes you hard enough to knock you to the ground. You'd be upset, right? Now then, as you're getting up, a drunk driver smashes over the sidewalk and into the building right where you were just standing...hrmmm...seems a different scenario now, even though NOTHING HAS CHANGED about the event. Your *belief* about the intent of the person who pushed you is the only thing that has changed.)

When someone says "Linux sucks, Vista is more secure", my logic dictates that the individual who posted that is a moron and has no experience with the true power of open source. But what drives me to act is my belief: a) my favored OS is under attack and b) by proxy *I* am under attack. (Just making a point, as I've stated *truth* that contradicted my viewpoint (i.e. Linux has it's share of security issues, etc...) because it's true, not because I believe it to be true.) How many who've posted from page 13 to the last page on this thread can say likewise? How many have posted sensible, thought-provoking truth *even if it weakened their stance*?

If you can raise your hand to that, congrats...you're a mature individual.

If you can't: Get some facts, fuucktard, and drop the blind trust. It'll bite you in the end.

 

[infra_red_dude]

@iMav: dude, bsd is not a joke! it aint like this... today somebody says i'm tired of hacking xyz os, tom i'll hack into a bsd system and its done!

making statements is easy but practically hacking into a bsd system is no child's play. of corz, its not impossible! nothing is! afterall its all man made.. if man can make it.. then he can break it too! its not god sent.

but hacking into a bsd system is not easy like hacking into any xyz OS!

 

[iMav]

as i said earlier if some 1 has a problem with the claims of the source fight it with them coz BSD based OS by a some company that goes by the name of Apple Inc. (may be some small company who has no idea baout coding an OS) was hacked

 

[rocket357]

hmmm ... looks like some members need to reminded about a small incident which wasn't a shock to the MAC fraternity and they said that we are secure as long as hackers dont train their eyes on other OSs and as far as my knowledge goes ... os x is based on bsd aint it :roll:

This arguement, like so many of your posts, is based on association. Think about it...

Girls = (time)(money)
time = money
money^2 = evil (money is the root of all evil)

Does this mean you can factor it all out and make the conclusion that girls = evil? That's a faulty association. Your argument, likewise, is a faulty association. BSD (for starters, BSD is the code released from Berkeley...OpenBSD/NetBSD/FreeBSD/etc... are all derivative works. Apple OSX is a derivative of FreeBSD (as far as my understanding goes...anyone have proof otherwise, please share).

Does this mean that your arguement holds that OpenBSD is crap because Apple OSX (a "distant relative" if you will), which has been broken in horrible ways to make it more friendly and functional, has security problems?

Check CERT (or any given vulnerability tracking database system, for that matter), and draw conclusions based on fact. Then come back and speak intelligently, please.

 

[kumarmohit]

I have a car. I'm not a mechanic. I've put in the effort to *learn* how to accomplish routine tasks to ensure the safety and security of my car.

Likewise, if I were given the opportunity to use a bank that was more secure, I'd put forth the effort to *learn*.

You can and you have learnt becoz you have:
~ Quest
~ Attitude

and above all the time to learn, not everyone however so equipped. So not everyone can learn BSD.

 

[rocket357]

making statements is easy but practically hacking into a bsd system is no child's play. of corz, its not impossible! nothing is! afterall its all man made.. if man can make it.. then he can break it too! its not god sent.

Ahh, sanity. Thank you for posting, infra_red_dude...you enlighten us all with your *logical* analysis of the situation.

You can and you have learnt becoz you have:
~ Quest
~ Attitude

and above all the time to learn, not everyone however so equipped. So not everyone can learn BSD.

Damn you, kumarmohit...you're good. Ok, I agree that not all people are "equipped" to pick up varying topics...but I've accomplished virtually EVERYTHING I've put my mind to, regardless of difficulty (probably because I'm just as stubborn as I am driven to learn).

I hate admitting it, but you've got a valid point there.

 

[iMav]

This arguement, like so many of your posts, is based on association. Think about it...

Girls = (time)(money)
time = money
money = evil^2 (money is the root of all evil)

Does this mean you can factor it all out and make the conclusion that girls = evil? That's a faulty association. Your argument, likewise, is a faulty association. BSD (for starters, BSD is the code released from Berkeley...OpenBSD/NetBSD/FreeBSD/etc... are all derivative works. Apple OSX is a derivative of FreeBSD (as far as my understanding goes...anyone have proof otherwise, please share).

Does this mean that your arguement holds that OpenBSD is crap because Apple OSX (a "distant relative" if you will), which has been broken in horrible ways to make it more friendly and functional, has security problems?

who the hell said that some thing is crap

ur the 1 who felt offended by the the title of the thread

from the way ur commenting ur the 1 who tried to imply tht vista is crap

 

[rocket357]

who the hell said that some thing is crap

ur the 1 who felt offended by the the title of the thread

hrmmm...then what was the point of your "Mac got hacked" post? Are you simply tossing out random tidbits to sound "in the know" or did you have an intelligent reason for posting?

I never said the title *offended* me. I just know faulty statements when I see them, and anyone with an ounce of logic would see that and agree. Vista is the most secure OS? Riiiiiiiiight. Amazing how security minded OS's were left out of the comparison (save Vista, that is)...

 

[iMav]

ur the 1 who has problems with the title and claim bsd is the best bsd is the most secure trying to imply that it cant be hacked or has no vulnerability and all we are saying is tha every OS has its flaws so dont rant about the product ur using and call the other uselss ... and hence i had to remind u about ur BSD being as vulnerable as windows and experts also saying the same

 

[infra_red_dude]

....imply that it cant be hacked or has no vulnerability

read his posts again. he's mentioned 2 bugfixes for BSD.
*www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showpost.php?p=542780&postcount=261

.....and all we are saying is tha every OS has its flaws....

very correct!

....and hence i had to remind u about ur BSD being as vulnerable as windows and experts also saying the same.

you are out of ur senses dude!!!! this is the most idiotic comment i've ever heard! err... make it the best joke i've ever heard!!

 

[iMav]

^^ if u draw a distinction between an absolutely non-usable version of BSD with a version that can be used by people ur right

 

[gxsaurav]

you are out of ur senses dude!!!! this is the most idiotic comment i've ever heard! err... make it the best joke i've ever heard!!

iMav got a point here. You guys said BSD is very secure & hard to hack. Well, then I also wonder how come Apple Mac OS X which is using the BSD kernel got hacked so many times easily due to simple bugs in WiFi driver

 

[infra_red_dude]

if u draw a distinction between an absolutely non-usable version of BSD with a version that can be used by people ur right

get over the myth!! free/open bsd is NOT ABSOLUTELY NON-USABLE as u think! get ur facts right. come outta the world of windows! you think like that coz you've been "born and brought up" in the world of windows!!! ask someone who's started his computing life wid linux. he feels linux is easy for him.

according to u.. a "usable" version of bsd is MacOSX? even then do u think mac os x is less secure than windows???!!! if u think so by jus looking at the graph shown in the title page and reading the blog then i dunno what to say! do u haf any concrete source to prove it.. an unbiased test? it also says winxp is more secure than ubuntu 6.06 or sled 10. i really dunno what to say!

and regarding the driver what gx is talking about, it is not a part of kernel. a person wid even a small percentage of common sense will understand that!!! again, it is coded/audited by apple. hmmm.. btw, what is this bug about? i dunno. plz enlighten me.

 

[rocket357]

iMav got a point here. You guys said BSD is very secure & hard to hack. Well, then I also wonder how come Apple Mac OS X which is using the BSD kernel got hacked so many times easily due to simple bugs in WiFi driver

First: Bug in the WiFi driver != kernel vulnerability.
Same with bug in ATI driver for Vista != kernel vulnerability.

Second: If Win2000Pro is vulnerable to an attack, does that mean Win2003 is vulnerable too? They're based on the same source code, afterall!

Furthermore, Mac uses a horribly defaced BSD kernel. Saying it's the same thing is like calling a horse and a pig the same thing. Yeah, they both walk on 4 legs, but it's NOT the same animal. The kernels used by virtually any "2nd generation" BSD system (for instance, OpenBSD, NetBSD, etc...) are not the same. (If you consider them to be identical, then explain to me why FreeBSD/NetBSD are NOT vulnerable to the ipv6 overflow that OpenBSD was vulnerable to in March of this year).

Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP are based on the same source code, but this doesn't mean they're exactly the same (Look at a system call table for proof...2003 extends the capabilities of XP's kernel and refactors a few other calls. If this extending creates new vulnerabilities, you can't say XP is "just as vulnerable" as 2003.)

btw, what is this bug about? i dunno. plz enlighten me.

There's a wireless card available for Mac that has a driver vulnerability. Once the system is *turned on* with the card active, the system is vulnerable to attack. It's pretty serious, IMHO. Also, considering that drivers typically run with full kernel - level privilege, it's easy to see why drivers are so commonly attacked (and intentionally malicious "drivers" are the basis for many rootkit designs)

 

[gxsaurav]

Furthermore, Mac uses a horribly defaced BSD kernel. Saying it's the same thing is like calling a horse and a pig the same thing.

Macboy : No, you are lying. Mac OS X uses the same kernel. How dare you call Apple bad

 

[rocket357]

Macboy : No, you are lying. Mac OS X uses the same kernel. How dare you call Apple bad

A simple challenge, then:

Download the source code for OpenBSD's kernel. Download the source code for FreeBSD's kernel. Diff the files and tell me they're the same. If they aren't, then explain to me what "The" BSD kernel is, hrmm?

Well, then I also wonder how come Apple Mac OS X which is using the BSD kernel got hacked so many times easily due to simple bugs in WiFi driver

This "the" BSD kernel.

Also, you might want to check out this:
*www.levenez.com/unix/

 

[iMav]

a few mis-conceptions i never said bsd is more vulnerable than windows ... i said it is as vulnerable (may be not) but infra dude i tried installing my display card drivers on slax kill bill edition and if thats any thing that u call usable then u got to be kidding me

 

[din]

WOW

First I begged all users not to post in this thread, stop the war etc. But now (after rocket357 came to participate in discussion), it is like going back to the old days

Am I dreaming ? Quality posts again ! Great.

Now we can see the level of knowledege of those who post

iMav, gx, Zeeshan, I am taking back what I said, please continue posting in this thread, coz ...

Then we can see some Excellent replies which worth reading.

 

[rocket357]

i said it is as vulnerable (may be not)

How much experience with BSD do you have (any flavor of BSD)? How much of that is specifically OpenBSD? Oh, none? Jeez, you talk alot for someone with such little experience...(and don't BS me...if you can't figure out how to install drivers in Slackware, OpenBSD would slaughter you).

We seem to have strayed off topic...my original arguement was for OpenBSD, not *BSD in general. So what if there's 1500 (random number I pulled off my head...don't take that literally!) different flavors of BSD...none of them do the same code auditing and have as strict of standards as the OpenBSD project.

In fact, we seem to have strayed off both ends...my arguement was Vista vs. OpenBSD. Who cares about Mac/WinXP/Linux/etc...? I came into this stating the title was incorrect because OpenBSD is more secure than Vista.