>"linux is secure" >literally thousands of kernel

>>58233218
Linux != Android

Security through Obscurity.
People only thought linux was secure because an irrelevant fraction of people used it.
Now that it's seeing some reasonable popularity exploits are being revealed left and right.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.
Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

File: angry-man1.jpg (82KB, 720x631px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 720x631px

>>58233218
>"anime isn't autistic"
>literally for autistic people and little girls

File: 60643516_p0.jpg (228KB, 1200x1694px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1200x1694px

security by obscurity :D

>implying Android isn't using some old-ass kernel
You have to realize that Android still is stuck on 3.14.x instead of keeping up with mainline, plus a bunch of devices don't receive updates and users are too stupid to search for community stuff.

0/10 nice bait m8

>>58233218
>>literally thousands of kernel exploits over the years allowing root access on android
I was moderately sure that the kernel wasn't what was getting exploited to get root access on Android but instead other Android applications (system applications) getting exploited to facilitate the installation of the su binary.

>>58233303
Found the retard.

>>58233338
Back to your shithole /co/

>>58233401
>3.14.x
You realize that was released merely two years ago? So basically, it was insecure as fuck back then. And claiming that it is secure now is a pretty baseless statement. It's still shit and always will be.

>>58233303
Android is Linux to the exact same extent GNU is*. Both Android and GNU are operating systems built around the Linux kernel.

*with the exception of GNU/kFreeBSD and GNU/HURD, but nobody uses those anyways

>>58233321
Security through Obscurity is actually the security model of Microsoft, not Linux. Linux exploits are mainly due to it being used in high-value applications (webservers, enterprise systems) such that its worthwhile to devote resources to finding security flaws. But because it's open source, these flaws can be found and fixed quickly. Windows is closed-source, and nobody but Microsoft programmers even has access to the code (and none of them are able to understand it anyway because it's so poorly documented), which means not only does Windows still have flaws that should have been eliminated back in the 1990s, only Microsoft can identify and fix any new flaws. Furthermore, flaws are INTENTIONALLY introduced into Windows to facilitate the agenda of planned obsolescence.

File: 1328809751734.jpg (224KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1600x1200px

>>58233332
Nice pasta

>>58233469
Security is relative, moron. There's no such thing as "secure software", without updates everything will become insecure. Windows XP was perfectly secure when it came out, but only a retard would go online with it now. The operating system didn't become insecure, rather the definition of "secure" continously changes with the passage of time.

>>58233518
Difference being, that Windows XP was secure back then. Today, not so much. The thing is though: Linux never was and never will be secure.

>>58233518
>Windows XP was perfectly secure when it came out
Zero days exist.

>>58233401
Most android devices are on 3.10 or 3.16 since those are the longterm supported kernel version (which are supported for the next 2 year or so)

>>58233534
>Windows XP was secure back
PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFT. This has gotta be bait.

>>58233597
Well, I don't know if it actually was secure back then because I didn't pay much attention to computers and OS' back when I had it on my computer. I just assumed it for the sake of argument because he said it.

>>58233321
>>58233383
>Security through Obscurity.
So basically the source being open to allow multiple parties to scrutinize the code is "security by obscurity"? i guess security by obscurity is the reason why bugs are patched immediately in the linux kernel while big companies begs the researchers to not publicly reveal bugs two months after they was privately disclosed only to them: http://thehackernews.com/2015/01/windows-8-hacking-exploit.html

>>58233218
>"linux is secure"
There's no perfect software, software can only be as perfect as the humans that created it and precisely because of this is why open source model of development has advantage over closed source one: because it accepts there'll never exists perfect code.

In short, a simple question: if there exists a method to create perfect software what would be the purpose of opening the source to "study, change and improve the software"? perfect code doesn't need to be improved after all.

>>58233627
If you didn't pay much attention to computers and OS back then, how can you say that "Linux never was and never will be secure"? Heck, it was more secure than Windows XP and older back then thanks to having proper privilege separation, anon.

>>58233534
>Linux never was and never will be secure.
>I just assumed it for the sake of argument because he said it.
So you basically recognize you are just talking without knowing about the topic?

Hopefully google releases their linux-free phone OS soon, and android can stop giving linux a bad name. We'll still have the IoT problem, of course.

>>58233674
I was talking about Windows XP, not Linux. And obviously, when I said "never was", it was a hyperbole because Linux security has been lacking for as long as I can remember, not to mention the stability. Shit breaks all the time.

>>58233693
IoT will be a whole sea of exploits and data mining, either by big corps or 3rd partys.
People already fell for that meme.

>>58233218
best girl

>>58233693
>and android can stop giving linux a bad name
Theoretically is not android who is giving linux bad name but the hardware vendors who ships the software. Google updates and fixes android properly but the companies who sells the phone wants to cut costs and push programmed obsolescence, the average joe usually don't cares, the same reason why microsoft and apple can push bullshit on their users without fear any backlash. That is another reason why popularity is not a good way to measure quality.

>>58233383
>>58233644
Security through obscurity is when you can't look at the source code.
Security through minority is when it's not mainstream enough to bother with.
Security through design is security by design.

>>58233703
see >>58233644, if you compare at least the people working on the linux kernel is a lot more careful on what they push on it. Software without bugs doesn't exits so you would need to provide some information about your claims "security has been lacking for as long as I can remember" and "Shit breaks all the time".

>>58233534
Windows XP never had a firewall until a service pack added it a year later.
>secure
Bitch go away

>>58233518
>what is L4

Android is forked from an older version of Linux and has not been keeping up to date with the current kernel version. They do release their own security updates in parallel, but these do not always make it down to OEMs.

Linux has had many kernel exploits over the years, but so have Windows and Mac OS X.

itt nobody knows what security through obscurity is


in short, it's using non standard methods to avoid brute force or exploit scanners.

>i.e. changing default ports

has nothing to do with the source code

>>58233401
that the main iuse with Android
Google gives a shit about updating his OS like for example Apple (i dont like them but they car to update it) instead they give that job to distributor and most of the dont give a fuck so you end with alot of phones with alot of bugs

>>58233808
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity

>>58233808
>itt nobody knows what security through obscurity is
>>i.e. changing default ports
What the fuck are you on you dumb cunt?

Now use one of those exploit to get root access to any distro.... idiot

>>58234220
The point OP is making is that Linux is not secure.

File: Retard.jpg (55KB, 900x810px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 900x810px

>>58234333
Sure, let me exploit any version of Windows (even though it was patched just like Linux's security holes were) and say that Windows is insecure too!

FREETARDS ON SUICIDE WATCH!!!

another mactoddler thread.

>>58234220
So go use dirty cow, which 99% of boxes are still vulnerable to? Sure

Windows Subsystem on Linux brought along exploits to Windows after the beta launch.

True story.

Microsoft 4732
Apple 3498
Google 2172
Adobe 2135
Sun 1630
Linux 1577

Over the past 18 years

>>58236529
>which 99% of boxes are still vulnerable to?
*on Android
Fixes went out on Linux literally months ago.

>>58233338
It has become seemingly impossible to open a thread on 4chan and not be greeted with insane anti-anime propaganda by white supremacists, SJWs, cultural imperialists and other loonies.

>>58237007
They literally didn't, Corp environments are ALL using old ass boxes that are vulnerable

>>58237090
>They literally didn't, Corp environments are ALL using old ass boxes that are vulnerable
Moving the goalpost? You wanna retract your bullshit statement now?

>>58233332
>All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

Except that's fucking wrong you god damned piece of shit

>>58233218
More secure than windows, less secure than unix.