Of course not. There is a market for investing very little for some cheap malware and then putting it out there, waiting for the small amount of people (out of a billion of desptop users) falling for it. Also you go for the weakest link in defense, so scamming random desktop users is rarely a technical feat. It usually exploits the human, not the system.
But we also all know how money is actually distributed. So millions of random users being scammed for some money is still not the high reward scenario a server is. Much more work is invested there because the rewards are so much higher. And yet even then you often target people as the weak link. System security for a company is mainly user security. Teaching them to not fall for for scams as an entry way to the system. And there are a lot of professionals that basically made this their own social science of how I convey those things the best, how I enforce and regularly refresh those lessons, how to make people stick to best practices.
Are you trying to tell me this all happens in parallel to a technical server structure that actually isn't that safe but rarely exploited because nobody could be bothered to check for vulnerabilities as it's just Linux and the adoption rate is low?
I think you’re right. A single desktop, unless it is either someone in a position of power or access to trade secret files, is not a time effective attack vector.
A server on the other hand can access all of that stuff across an entire organization.
Not just that but whenever you hear that company xyz was hacked and their data leaked, what do you think was powering their servers? Most likely Linux. Sure, they usually have more things exposed to the internet, but users install way more apps so the attack surface is vastly bigger in home computers running Linux than servers.
I once had a machine (that I got 2nd hand) run a busy mysql server with over 1,200 days of uptime. When it was retired we painted the chassis gold and put it on display in the lobby.
Not quite. Unsetting HISTFILE, or setting it to an invalid path will mean the shell doesn’t update the history file while it quits. set +o history makes the shell stop recording until you do set -o history, which is useful if you want shell history generally, but don’t want some specific commands to be recorded - if you just unset HISTFILE, the commands still show up if you press the up arrow
If you’re feeling even more paranoid, go with something even more obscure like Plan 9 from Bell Labs. It’s Unix-like but differs so much from it that a Unix or Linux type malware would do nothing to it.
It’s a good question what I really want. I’m very satisfied with my current system (NixOS) but in the end it’s still Linux and stuff like the 9P filesystem just intrigues me. So it’s not like I’d need to switch or anything. But a playground to apply the concepts to some problems would be nice. Maybe I’ll try 9front some day and see what I can do with it
Indeed. A fun little project but unfortunately it doesn’t seem ready for any sort of daily use. Driver support (a crucial component) is probably pretty scarce. Their web browsers too are hit-or-miss, with one in particular (Links) that crashes when performing a during Google search.
Still, there are few alternatives that differ substantially from the original ancestral Unix that are available and more should be developed. GNU/Hurd and the BSD’s are the only ones I know of.
Windows is made by a company that would make this change in some countries but not all countries. We are not free until we are all free. Some operating systems guarantee that. Others do not.
I don’t disagree with you but dude people are sick of the politicization of everything and their operating system doesn’t even get onto that radar. They are ignorant and quite happy of it. Please let the pigs eat their shit in peace.
That said, it is quite telling that Microsoft apparently finds it more advantageous to have two divergent feature sets than to apply the change universally.
I get where you are coming from. FWIW I’m being a jackass for the hell of it rather than trying to start a flame war. But if someone is to get upset about it, perhaps its something for them to reflect on later.
FreeBSD unless I’m doing something that’s need a fairly secure system, in which case OpenBSD disconnected from the Internet with my private mirror for security patches.
Back in the day, I was very interested in (the now extinct) PC-BSD, but it really didn't like the unusual HDD setup I had (Third IDE channel maybe? The details are fuzzy now.)
Never got to the stage of trying gaming on it, but I think I might have been planning to dual boot?
Anyway, it must have been a while ago because that was my previous PC, which I donated to a relative the better part of a decade ago.
So, given that it was a FreeBSD, I guess that's what I'd be looking into, but I can't say I know enough right now.
linuxmemes
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.