• DiabolicalBird@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Regardless of us using Linux on our home computers, most businesses and services use Windows machines. Your information is likely still stored on Windows machines elsewhere if you interact with the world at all.

    With that in mind, it’s worth being aware of Windows security problems when they come up.

  • Observer1199@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    155
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    There’s absolutely zero need to mention any other OS than Windows if the article is about Windows.

    I guarantee you that 2025 will not be the year of the Linux desktop, just like 2024 wasn’t, and just like 2023 wasn’t, just like 2022 wasn’t…

    Signed,

    Linux users that aren’t annoying and aren’t driving people away from using Linux with their self-righteous smugness.

    • oshu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Been using linux on my desktop since 1999. Don’t need an official declaration.

        • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          24 hours ago

          I mean, I’ve been hearing it for 15 years, we can’t be wrong for that long, right? Which means that next year it’s 100%!

          • naeap@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Yeah, I also think with just so few alternatives, just by pure chance alone this should already very probably be the year of Linux on desktop

      • Monstrosity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        Would it even be a good thing if Linux became super main stream? Maybe we should be careful what we wish for.

        • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          19 hours ago

          How would it be bad? More hardware support, more users not feeding data to corporations, more software support and so on.

          • Monstrosity@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            I’m not sure. I envision a lot of regulatory stuff happening around the kernel as it becomes more popular & vital to infrastructure. As that happens, the direction of it becomes more controlled and eventually maybe becomes unrecognizable.

            But maybe the fact it’s open source flat out prevents that?

            I really don’t know, I’m not a futurists, I was just internet speculating.

              • Monstrosity@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 hours ago

                That’s true.

                But Android getting more & more locked down as time goes on is a good example of what I’m afraid of might start happening once there are too many cooks in the kitchen.

                I’m just speculating out of nowhere.

    • EnderMB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      20 hours ago

      It’s really sad that this needs to be said. I 100% agree with the sentiment. The reason I use Linux is because most of my work requires Linux, but I resisted it for a really long time because communities like these are just incredibly toxic and insufferable. Sometimes looking at this community makes me want to rage-boot Windows and become a C# dev all over again.

    • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      In this case I actually mainly meant MacOS, which has a relatively big market share. Though for me personally it’s Linux, it applies to all other operating systems, with MacOS being the one large enough that people who use windows can’t ignore it. I’m not a fan of these “here’s what you need to know” titles because it doesn’t add anything, the title would be functionally the same without it. I was making fun of this by saying that I don’t need to know this and thus showing that (this part of) the title is only included to get more clicks

      • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        I actually mainly meant MacOS

        Maybe I’m just dumb or something, but you’re really burying the lede on this MacOS angle by having your meme say “Me with linux”

    • Monstrosity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      Pretty sure the success of Linux will not ride or die on the Charisma stat of its users.

  • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Sometimes Mint tells me there are security updates available. Happened just this morning. Updating makes me feel good :)

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Anti-virus is not going to stop you from stupidity. You classic “Anti-virus” won’t stop anything more than run of the mill simple stuff.

      • DragonsInARoom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Most of the time that’s what people need an antivirus for, most attacks the average person will suffer will be some script that’s easily caught by the antivirus.

        • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          If the script doesn’t have permission to do anything it doesn’t matter. See Android as an example.

    • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      20 hours ago

      most antivirus apps are very invasive, heavy on resources and even spy on you. Windows defender is usually enough. However, virustotal is still recommended

        • Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          20 hours ago

          I would say yes? Many if my friends in uni were using laptops that had McAfee built in. I’m not exaggerating when I say they were unusable. I removed that shit and those machines were snappy af.

  • Rikj000@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Bootkitty?

    However,
    you can already patch your BIOS to become secure again! :)

    All in all, Windows security is a joke compared to Linux’s.

    • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      Windows security is… fine? It could be better, but it’s pretty much on par with linux security. Both have their vulns, but they’re both also able to be secured enough that most (if not all) major data breaches are via phishing or other social engineering attacks, not solely software exploits. There’s lots of fodder for the Linux vs. M$ debate, but this one is maybe a bit out of date.

      • DoeJohn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        22 hours ago

        If you actually dig deeper into the Linux security topic, you’d find out that Linux is actually not very secure. GrapheneOS developers made quite a lot of posts on what Linux distros (and the kernel) are missing in terms of security. A lot of “Linux security and the lack of viruses” rides on the waves of “there is hardly any point of creating malware for a system with such a small user base, plus you have to consider the fact that people knowledgeable enough just to install a Linux distro would be a bit more careful about their computers than the average Joe”.

        • Ooops@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          there is hardly any point of creating malware for a system with such a small user base

          Actually the whole world runs on linux, Windows is mostly the low level consumer end.

          Which makes your argument true for a certain segment of malware (the cheap low tech stuff more akin to scams etc targeting people en mass but expected to have a low return), but not actually for the parts where the money is that justify elaborate malware and hacks.

          • Crazyslinkz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            20 hours ago

            The internet runs on linux.

            (Webservers, some network equipment, monitoring servers, NAS, DNS, … lots of services can be setup and ran for free on linux. ((Companies like free)))

            • Ooops@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 hours ago

              A lot of companies stuff also runs on linux when it’s not free, just so they can avoid having to manage the hardware side… see: Google Cloud, AWS, Azure etc.

              The amount of companies having their whole infrastructure run by one of the big cloud services on linux servers nowadays is far too high to make a serious argument of “linux is only secure because it’s irrelevant and no one cares to break it”.

            • Zorsith
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              18 hours ago

              Most companies like free. Larger companies like support contracts and shifting liability.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I want a Linux system that is entirely rootless by leveraging containers and service accounts.

        Think about it. Instead of having root you could just have a utility that connects to a daemon that is in a sandboxed environment.

    • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      bootkitty wasn’t implemented ever and if you use GUID Partition Table and your bios is set to uefi without csm, it can’t affect you, since Bootkitty embeds itself into the Master Boot Record and there exploits the LogoFail vulrenability (this was already patched btw) with as far as i remember, a self-extracting steganographical bitmap image for arbritary code execution to bypass Secure Boot with injecting face certifications to Moklist. Also, it only runs on select devices, far from all Linux systems are vulrenabe.

  • JasminIstMuede
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    I mean… a form of Microsoft Defender is available for Linux, but only for enterprise customers if I remember correctly 😅