I mean, I don’t agree, but I can see negative knock-on effects of Linux getting more popular… like more viruses and malware being developed for Linux and Linux noobs getting widely infected because Linux kind of requires you to know enough about your own system to secure it yourself while Microsoft does a lot of the security for you out of the box.
In my experience, UFW isn’t enabled out-of-the-box. WIndows has a default Firewall enabled out of the box.
So yeah, unless Linux is quickly made a lot more user-friendly in terms of security, the growth in Linux can be seen as a bad thing.
lemmyvore@feddit.nl 10 months ago
Right. 😂 Considering how badly designed Windows security is, I guarantee you that pretty much any Linux defaults should be better.
Microsoft has to do a lot of extra stuff because the security is so bad. The simplest example is that you can’t run Windows without antivirus and firewall, you can with Linux.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 months ago
That’s literally only because there isn’t large enough marketshare of Linux to make it worth doing…
As Linux marketshare increases that will change but I guess that point went right over your head.
lemmyvore@feddit.nl 10 months ago
But Linux has a huge market share on servers. If it were possible for viruses and malware to affect it, they would have done so by now. Servers are a much more valuable target for malware anyway since they run on powerful hardware and have access to good connections and lots of interesting data.
Linux systems aren’t as prone to remote exploits, their software is more up to date, and it’s much harder to execute code on them.
wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 months ago
Viruses and malware do effect linux servers. It’s not tough to do a search for CVEs on this stuff.
At my job we’ve got a red mark on an audit because of some dev’s pet Linux server was vulnerable to multiple critical CVEs. Thankfully it was isolated from the rest of our network due to being a dev’s pet project and not something we were officially supporting.
Linux may be more secure, but there’s no magic button for any OS to be perfectly protected against malware if you aren’t taking proper steps to protect it.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 months ago
zdnet.com/…/linux-malware-attacks-are-on-the-rise…
vmware.com/…/exposing-malware-in-multi-cloud.html
It’s literally marketshare. Linux isn’t by default more hardened. It can be more hardened by a professional who understands security, but it’s still at risk for all the same things Windows servers are, especially Social Engineering. Humans are almost always the weakest link in the security chain.
But sure, I guess we couldn’t trust the research of VMware or anything. Please get out of here with this outright misinformation.
wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 months ago
It’s really nowhere near as bad as it used to be. Windows Defender is more than enough antivirus for any user not downloading shady pirate shit, and it’s secure enough for businesses.
lemmyvore@feddit.nl 10 months ago
A security solution that works by letting the malware in and then maybe catching it is a terrible solution.