

What If All the World Ran Linux? - Garbage
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/122210-what-if-all-the-world.html?page=1

======
jjcm
His entire blog post is based on the assumption that linux wouldn't have as
much malware - however keep in mind that the greatest risk to a system is the
user themselves. It doesn't matter how hardened the system is or how many
protection schemes are built in, if you have a pop up telling the user "ENTER
YOUR ROOT PASSWORD AND WIN $$$ NOW!" eventually someone is going to do it.

At some point users will cry out for a system that doesn't require a password
to install stuff, and someone will react to provide that product to the
market.

Remember that there's a lot more to computer security than computers.

~~~
Homunculiheaded
this is where package management is great. The user that will enter their root
password to win $$$ is also the user who is way less likely to open up a
config file and add an untrusted repo. Not to mention the benefit of automatic
software updates. The iphone appstore has already trained users to use what is
essentially a package management system (without the option to add other
repos).

~~~
rbanffy
Once the program has sudo privileges, it can pretty much add a pirate repo (or
replace an official one), changing crypto keys and so on...

OTOH, Linux users don't google program names and download executables they run
as admins from the first hit they get.

------
Mithrandir
Original article:
[http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/214596/what_if...](http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/214596/what_if_all_the_world_ran_linux.html)

~~~
rbanffy
And HN discussion:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2032776>

------
jawee
I'm beginning to see Linux as simple a broad open platform that is very
customizable to individual needs. The idea of the spanning, generally somewhat
similar but incompatible enough to be a nuisance, problematic because you have
to install it on your own in virtually all cases, desktop Linux is a dying
breed. I say this as a sole user of desktop Linux for nearly ten years
(currently typing in CrunchBang, a Debian respin).

Why? The places where Linux has slowly started to spin are independent
ecosystems each spun from Linux. This has slowly been becoming the case in the
mobile sphere. But the mobile OSs that are winning are not the ones that are
much codeshared with desktop Linux like Maemo, but those that exist in
independent ecosystems like webOS and Android, not to mention the open source
devices like Kindles and Tom Toms that you never think about the OS on.

Even the main Linux distros for desktops and similar x86 devices are beginning
to separate. Ubuntu is looking at alternatives to the X server. Chrome OS has
the possibility to make inroads which is not a traditional distro in any
sense. Linux as a kernel is becoming something diverse that can be respun to
many different uses.

Used to, the Linux landscape was fairly consistent. Mobile devices that ran
the Linux kernel were using much of the same code and software as the desktop
Linux distros. For example, Dillo was a web browser used on Linux ports to
mobile devices and the desktop. I had mobile Linux devices in the past that
ran Pidgin.

------
arethuza
"Windows tends to be associated with a lot of unplanned downtime"

I would say that Windows is more associated with the need to have a lot of
_planned_ downtime.

~~~
rbanffy
I think both situations happen with a much higher frequency than competing
platforms.

------
bediger
What part of Linux' greater immunity to malware comes from the more logical
permissions, and the more free-form naming?

By that, I mean that "executable" comes from a permission, not from an
"extension", and that "extensions" in Linux are really just naming
conventions.

I also note that every one not leveraged to the hilt into Microsoft technology
acknowledges the effect of the Windows monoculture.

~~~
rbanffy
Indeed. If Joe Clueless downloads a program and double clicks it, it won't
run.

If the user is so clueless as to download malware, he probably won't be able
to chmod it into executableness.

------
tzs
I like how the first point is essentially that the diversity of Linux would
make it hard for malware writers because of the differences between
distributions, and the last point seems to assume that the diversity is NOT a
problem to writing Linux software.

