4 ms·
One question that is worth asking is how many of these exploits can be done remotely, and how many of these exploits require physical permission to a system? I
by Spyro7 15y ago
One question that is worth asking is how many of these exploits can be done remotely, and how many of these exploits require physical permission to a system?
It is worth noting that there is a difference between exploits that require physical access and those that can be conducted remotely.
Speaking just for myself, I am not certain which operating system is more or less secure, but I do not think that operating system security matters as much as user habits. I have ran Windows XP since 2001 and I have never once suffered from malware or a virus (except when I transferred a USB-stick virus onto one of my computers just to see what would happen). I know that the plural of anecdote is not data, but it is worth noting that it can and has been done.
- kenjackson 15y agoMany of them can be done remotely, as has been done at Pwn20wn for several years on OSX. But to actually create a weaponized attack that can get on a lot of machines requires a fair bit of work. If you're going to do that, it's probably worth going the extra mile and attacking a much larger installed user base. But, what's even easier is just doing malware that the user installs. You can write it in a fraction of the time, and you probably get similar infection rates.