Andrew Wyatt wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:38 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Steve Clark wrote:
On 07/14/2014 11:26 AM, William Woods wrote:
On Jul 14, 2014, at 10:19 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
William Woods wrote:
Please stop top posting.
On Jul 14, 2014, at 9:48 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote: > William Woods wrote: >> On Jul 14, 2014, at 7:15 AM, Always Learning centos@u62.u22.net >> wrote: >>> On Mon, 2014-07-14 at 06:42 -0400, Steve Clark wrote: >>> >>>> Having been working with UNIX like systems since 1985 >>>> my biggest complaint with systemd is it so intrusive, it wants
to
>>>> be everything which makes it vulnerable to bugs and exploits - >>>> umm.. like Windoze! >>>> My $.02 >>> + $ 10.00 :-) >> Because UNIX has never had a bug or exploit right ? >> > Well... we know that > 50% of the Web and 'Net runs on Linux and > other unices. Compare and contrast the number of Windows Server > vulnerabilities that have been exploited to those of *Nix... and, > for extra credit, how fast they were admitted, and fixed..... > Like OpenSSL ?
I suggest you google with the following search criteria: "windows server" exploits
Sigh, nothing like a zealot. ALL OS's have vulns and exploits, no
matter
what you decide to believe.
Sigh, nothing like someone who is in a constant state of deniability.
Replying to this, because I saw a reply from him, but there was no new content, for some reason.
Anyway, he also seems determined to see it all as black and white, rather than looking at the *much* larger set of bugs and
vulnerabilities that
Windows Server has had than any version of 'Nix. Sure, we have some... but a *lot* fewer, and overwhelmingly far less serious.
Yup, overwhelmingly less serious.
Oh, wait.
This is *pointless*. Point to something *OTHER* than heartbleed. And as this is the CentOS list, please note that 5.x was *not* affected at all.
Or does your attention span not go back more than a couple of months?
mark, getting annoyed