[rlanday]

> > The Windows ecosystem typically deployed in corporate PCs or workstations is often insecure, slow, and poorly implemented

> Yes, but that's not because of Windows itself

Come on. There’s a reason Windows users all want to install crappy security products: they’ve been routinely having their files encrypted and held for ransom for the last decade.

[didntcheck]

And Linux/BSD generally would not help here. Ransomeware is just ordinary file IO and is usually run "legitimately" by phished users rather than actual code execution exploits

I have a similar disdain for security bloatware with questionable value, but one actually effective corporate IT strategy is using one of those tools to operate a whitelist of safe software, with centralized updates

[consteval]

I think having a Linux/BSD might be helpful here in the general case, because the culture is different.

In Windows land it's pretty much expected that you go to random websites, download random executables, ignore the "make changes to your computer?" warnings and pretty much give the exe full permission to do anything. It's very much been the standard software install workflow for decades now on Windows.

In the Linux/BSD world, while you can do the above, people generally don't. Generally, they stick to trusted software sources with centralized updates, like your second point. In this case I don't think it's a matter of capability, both Windows and Unix-land is capable of what you're suggesting.

I think phishing is generally much less effective in Max/Linux/BSD world because of this.

[codebolt]

I'd wager if Linux had the same userbase as Windows, you'd see more ransomware attacks on that platform as well. Nothing about Linux is inherently more secure.

[pid-1]

Yeah I don't get where this "Linux is more secure" thing comes from.

Basically any userspace program can read your .aws, .ssh, .kube, etc... The user based security model desktops have is the real issue.

Compare that with Android and iOS for instance. No one needs anti-virus bloatware, just because apps are curated and isolated by default.

[quotemstr]

What fraction of ransomware attacks would these security products have prevented exactly? Windows already comes with plenty of monitoring and alerting functionality.

[bombcar]

Probably close to none at some point. They may block some things.

But most of Windows falling to this is that it’s what people use. The only platform that is somewhat actually protected against attacks is the iPhone - the Mac can easily be ransomwared it’s just the market is so small nobody bothers attacking it; no ROI.

[lbadmin]

Hard to say, but windows defender doesn't stop as many as EDR's can. There are actual tests for this, ran by independent parties that check exactly this. Defender can be disabled extremely easily, modern EDRs cannot.

[qwytw]

> There’s a reason Windows users

Yes, average Windows users are significantly less tech literate due to obvious reasons and there are way more of them. This create a very lucrative market.

How is desktop Linux somehow inherently particularly more secure than Windows?