Re: Win 2000 any better?

[Mikael Olsson <mikael.olsson () enternet se>]

I'd just like to point out a couple of things regarding security
here...

1. Win2000 might have more nifty security policies and editors in place,
but that does not constitute security in and of itself.

2. Most attacks that we see today have NOTHING to do with setting
object-based security in operating systems. 

3. Most attacks today are based on BUGS in the operating systems 
and applications.

4. The average programmer goofs up (causes a bug) on average in 
1-3 places per 1000 lines of code.

5. Win2000 introduces some 15 million (more? little less?) lines
of new code.

6. Go figure what's secure or not until it's been running for a while
and a couploe of one hundred new bugs have been found and corrected.



Phil Cox wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, REID FOX wrote:
>
> > I am getting ready to set up a small LAN w/www access I need compatability
> > and price for an Internet cafe so I decided to start with NT
> > Has anyone had any experience with WIN2000?
> > Is it any better/worse/same as NT for security issues?
>
> Pure Win2K is much tighter than a corresponding WinNT net, BUT as with all
> Windows systems, you mess up just a little bit, and your toast :)
>
> I have been running it for a while.
>
> Phil

-- 
Mikael Olsson, EnterNet Sweden AB, Box 393, S-891 28 ÖRNSKÖLDSVIK
Phone: +46-(0)660-105 50           Fax: +46-(0)660-122 50
Mobile: +46-(0)70-248 00 33
WWW: http://www.enternet.se        E-mail: mikael.olsson () enternet se