It Doesn’t Reflect On Security? No. Just On Canonical.
Canonical, the commercial sponsor of the Ubuntu Linux, has said that compromises of most of its local community servers this week do not reflect on the distribution’s security or enterprise-readiness.
The company said such criticisms were wide off the mark, since the affected servers were running old, unpatched versions of Ubuntu as well as a number of insecure web applications.
……………………
On the contrary. The compromises reflect directly on the security of Ubuntu, or any other OS, because they illustrate clearly what happens in the real world. Even “Canonical, the commercial sponsor of the Ubuntu Linux…” hadn’t bothered to keep their servers updated and that is what will happen to the majority of installations. It’s also a lesson for home users. Stay updated.
Comments (3) to “It Doesn’t Reflect On Security? No. Just On Canonical.”
Post a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Michael wrote:
I really think they need to take updating security patches out of the users hands! Make them auto-update for security issues, but let the user decide when to reboot, if they do not reboot within 24 hours, then auto reboot.
WAY too many people dont even bother using windows update! I know this is about Linux, but same concept
I remember when I have Ubuntu installed it told me when there were updates but never automatically downloaded and installed them.
Mike
Users are bad - make it auto!!
Posted on 23-Aug-07 at 7:24 am | Permalink
Oldster wrote:
Some of the distributions have an automatic reminder that functions when there is an available update — Ubuntu, RedHat and Xandros come to mind immediately — but you still need to gove it permission to do it. It seems likely that both linux users and developers would be reluctant about a completely automatic process. Independent lot, you know.
I have one machine running XP and have the automatic update turned on for it.
Posted on 23-Aug-07 at 11:11 am | Permalink
Michael wrote:
Windows auto-update doesnt actually get all of the updates either, except on Vista. XP and before only get the critical ones, where Vista can can device drivers and everything else too.
Mike
Hey 1 nice feature of Vista
other than everything keep crashing on me and I am going to have to reinstall 
Posted on 24-Aug-07 at 7:33 am | Permalink