this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
1114 points (96.9% liked)

linuxmemes

20688 readers
1170 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 22 points 1 month ago (6 children)

I'm pretty sure Windows is plenty secure. It isn't private or usercentric but of on a security perspective it isn't bad.

Linux has plenty of security problems just like any OS

[–] cqst@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I’m pretty sure Windows is plenty secure.

Haha sure. Windows NT MIGHT be considered 'secure' from an architectural standpoint but literally of this falls apart when you tape all the Microsoft Dark Patterns on it that ruin the security. Its a joke, and that's the entire problem.

Think: Microsoft Accounts, now the "secure" Windows NT Local User Authentication is effectively backdoored by MS and makes you vulnerable to phishing attacks. Windows Update: Constantly pushing dark patterns and 'features' that it discourages people from updating so then guess what, people don't update! The fact that Windows so easily allows Crowdstrike to make system level changes like this without trying a whiny fit is also apart of it. Think about the fact how easily Microsoft allows stuff like Valorant anti-cheat and Crowdstrike, which are effectively rootkits, to be installed with one UAC prompt. In reality this issue is not really Microsoft's fault directly, but in a bunch of indirect ways they encourage this and allow it to happen, and we have seen time and time again, Microsoft DOES NOT CARE ABOUT SECURITY.

If anything this "Crowdstrike" software showcases the endemic problem in software security and how our system is failing and continuing to fail us. Its an anti-virus, but we already HAVE Windows Defender. These corporations should not be using some random 3rd party Antivirus, I doubt it even does much good, its just cargo-culting "oh, this is industry standard, so we have to use it." This is the kind of thinking/approach that Microsoft encourages.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 month ago

Well an organization shouldn't be giving end users admin. That's a recipe for disaster. From an updates perspective you can tightly control which update is applied and when.

Microsoft makes some crappy decisions but they do know who there big customers are.

load more comments (4 replies)