Here is the response I posted on Linux Today:


Subject: Author is just a paid hack... ( Oct 12, 2002, 17:46:53 )

The author writes articles for hire, and will express as "truth" any viewpoint that the client wants expressed, no matter how badly the facts have to be mangled. The 'client' in this case is, no doubt, Microsoft. See what the author can do for you!


http://www.bridgewriter.com/examples.html


So, it doesn't matter that the author, who supposedly has a background as a 'data manger' and 'customer service rep', is making false statements. That is what she/he is paid to do. Microsoft PR folks can then make copies of this phoney "news" article and bundle it with similar bogus articles which purport to show that Microsoft is equal to or more secure than Linux/Unix. The MS sales rep then gives the bundle to clueless CEOs who think such prepackaged FUD is fact.


One also has to ask why NewsFactor Network, which includes "Linux Insider" and "OsOpinion", would publish such an article as a "Special Report"? What is so special about a paid hack job? Nothing.


Zager quoted a lot from Eric Hemmendinger, leaving the impression that he believed that Linux was younger, less mature and therefore more plagued with viruses and worms. However, Commendinger didn't mention Linux at all when discussing major threats on the internet today in the article at http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/19011.html



"If you just think about the greater number of applications that people are dealing with, compared to a number of years ago, there are more patches to deal with than there used to be," he noted.

Two of the most notorious and costly recent threats, the Code Red and Nimda viruses, exploited known vulnerabilities for which patches were already available, IDC senior security analyst Allan Carey told NewsFactor.


"There are restraints that some of the companies are facing in just trying to keep up with the patches," Carey said. "And just think when you have to distribute those over a number of machines or applications -- sometimes that process is even done manually."


The two Linux worms whose global effects Zager misrepresented in an effort to make them look as serious as CodeRed, SirCam or Klez, infected less than 7,000 computers in a weeks time, mostly in Eastern Europe. CodeRed, on the otherhand, hit 350,000 infections in just a few days. Contrary to what Commendinger is quoted as saying, "You're still not immune," Hemmendinger said, "but you can be reasonably sure that [a vulnerability] that was publicized a year ago won't bite you." , I have no doubt CodeRed, SirCam, and some of their decendent viruses and worms filling the Internet data streams, are infecting each day as many PCs and Slapper did in its entire life, about one week. So, Windows users are being bitten again and again by old bugs using old security holes.

And YES, almost any distro of Linux IS more secure than any version of Windows.