[K12OSN] Windows vs. Linux test by Symantec
Martin Woolley
sysadmin at handsworth.bham.sch.uk
Thu Mar 9 09:00:55 UTC 2006
On Wednesday 08 Mar 2006 18:50, David Trask wrote:
> I was reading an article about a test conducted by Symantec (Maker of
> Norton AV...and other stuff) and this paragraph caught my eye....
>
> Windows XP Professional, said Symantec, stays safe just one hour and 12
> seconds, while the
> Windows 2000 Server (with SP4) made it an hour and 17 minutes. An
> unpatched Windows Server 2003 system lasted somewhat longer.
I'm surprised the XP box lasted that long. I've been re-installing a bunch of
our XP boxes this week, the sequence being install XP, install the NIC
drivers, install A/V software, activate, patch, install office, etc, etc. In
3 of the 4 cases, the box has becomee infected before I can install the A/V
software (which is being installed from a shared drive). These boxes are
being infected within the first few seconds of them being able to talk to the
network. I've taken great delight in showing this to the staff - some are
finally realising that M$ is insecure and Linux is very secure.
--
Regards
Martin Woolley
ICT Support
Handsworth Grammar School
Isis Astarte Diana Hecate Demeter Kali Inanna
*************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email
in error please notify postmaster at bgfl.org
The views expressed within this email are those of the
individual, and not necessarily those of the organisation
*************************************************************
More information about the K12OSN
mailing list