On Fri, 2014-10-10 at 12:19 -0400, James B. Byrne wrote:
> On Thu, October 9, 2014 21:11, John R Pierce wrote:
> > On 10/9/2014 6:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> >> BTW, the whole idea of "antivirus" is flawed. It is based on "enumerate
> >> bad". You can't, as one never knows what will be invented in a future.
> >
> > I agree, but I don't know what else you can put in the hands of the
> > novice, unless its the iPhone world of corporate approved apps only
> > purchased through a monopoly 'app store'.
> >
>
> Which simply means: Only 'Government Approved' viruses allowed.
Excellent point. Windows 95 was designed to be accessible by the USA
authorities. USA anti-virus software "allows" access from the USA
authorities.
Remember M$'s "3 knocks" and you are in Windoze software ?
The greater the difference between (Windoze, Lindoze etc.) and Linux the
better.
I am sure M$ could have designed a much more secure operating system:
But it didn't. Hence the success of superior non-Windoze operating
systems. Keeping Linux pure from the Windoze influence is essential even
if it means upsetting systemd fans :-)
--
Regards,
Paul.
England, EU.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
