RE: [Full-Disclosure] CyberInsecurity: The cost of Monopoly

["Bruce Ediger" <eballen1@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Rick Kingslan wrote:

> I'll not argue that the Windows operating systems are the target of the
> majority of virus', but that's typically what happens when a system is used
> by a known large group of people that might not be qualified to run a
> computer, much less secure it.

Doesn't this just constitute special pleading to use Microsoft's products?
For example, this theory is totally unfalsifiable - only Microsoft products
are in such a position.

Oh, wait.  Apache has about 2 times the market share of IIS, and I'm
still getting Code Red and Nimda hits TWO YEARS after they were released.

By contrast, I only got about 2 days worth of hits from Slapper.

> The 'bad guys' and 'bored kids' are going to target the largest base - and
> there will always be holes to compromise and exploit.  Viruses have never
> been a threat to Open Source because the target is not yet juicy enough.

Yeah, I guess you're right: Apache's 60% market share is just not "juicy"
enough.  Despite it being so much easier to write Linux shell code than
Win32 shell code.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html