The Linux operating system, along with Microsoft Windows Vista and Mac OS X, will be pitted against one another in an “ethical” hacking contest. The CanSecWest Vancouver 2008 security conference will be hosting the competition to see which operating system is the most secure. Is this really a contest that matters even remotely? There are so many variables in a contest like this that one has to consider this as nothing more than a fun exercise, since it won't actually prove any distinction in regards to security between the operating systems. Linux itself is probably the biggest variable; which version of Linux will be used? Will security measures be put in place before the operating systems are tested, or will it just be an out-of-the-box install? Does finding a hack in one, but not another, really prove that the hacked operating system is less secure?

The “ethical” hacking contest needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Each distribution of Linux varies here and there in terms of security; some lock down the system extremely tightly; some employ powerful security software like SELinux by default; some leave ports open on their firewalls that others lock down. Linux isn't like Windows or Mac OS X; there isn't just one flavor, with one set of stipulated defaults. Linux is the most secure operating system without a doubt, because it's open to prying eyes; everyone can look and peer into its secure code; this makes it stronger, less likely to be compromised; everyone knows its weaknesses so that those weaknesses are recoded and turned into strengths. And Linux's open nature, it's ability to be configured at the kernel level, gives anyone the freedom to make it as secure or as insecure as they prefer.

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Be first to comment this article

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment © Copyright 2004 by Arthur Konze - www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved

---