I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not, but if not: the idea that Linux is any more secure against a nation state than windows is ridiculous. There are no shortage of regular vulns discovered in each part of the Linux OS as used by stuxnet.
Yeah, I never understood why people think like this. I often read people saying Linux is most secure or some Unix or Mac, Any operating system can be equally vulnerable, humans are writing code for it after all. And blaming Microsoft for the insecure OS seems even worse. Their OS runs on way too many machines, making it the first target. I love linux, not for the security, but just for the utilities on the command line I can use. I'd feel equally unsafe on either OS!
You can run whatever system (L4 with formal verification and written in super secure language...) as long as there no redundant checks you are already doomed from start. Stuxnet is nice example why critical system must have at least:
* Somebody periodically in person checking what happening and cross-checking results with operator
* Have alternative monitoring system, even amateur arduino system with rs-422/485 network and independent sensors, can become impenetrable wall for Stuxnet type worms.
wepple|7 years ago
ishaanbahal|7 years ago
bleke|7 years ago
* Somebody periodically in person checking what happening and cross-checking results with operator
* Have alternative monitoring system, even amateur arduino system with rs-422/485 network and independent sensors, can become impenetrable wall for Stuxnet type worms.