On 4 February 2016 at 15:07, Mazzini Alessandro <mazzi...@tin.it> wrote: > > I would disagree on this point. Unix and linux, in all its flavours, had > plenty of security fixes in the same timeframe mentioned, so I would not > consider them as safe as etc > > That they are less obvious to attack, in comparison, is another thing.
Oh yes, true, but you need to think about the roles. Unix was traditionally mostly used as a /server./ The exploits and malware are about getting remote access to a server, or at least taking it offline or rendering it inaccessible. Windows is primarily a client OS, used for surfing, email, chat, downloading & running programs, etc. /Totally/ different usage patterns. And the vast success of OS X as a client -- now the most successful closed-source UNIX® of all time, with more installed seats than all the others ever put together -- compared with the small amount of malware and very few successful exploits, shows the difference. -- Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)
