Linux more secure than Windows: BZ Research

No way. I read all those "Get The Facts" thingies, and they prove that Linux is a hippie commie un-American non-secure plot to steal our precious bodily fluids. Anyway the survey didn't include enough microshaft employees or MCSEs or Waggener-Edstrom reps or Ken Brown.

Isn't this just in line with the Honeynet Project's paper about life expectancy of unpatched operating systems (http://www.honeynet.org/papers/trends/life-linux.pdf)?

All the Wagg-Ed money in the world can't contradict personal experience, I guess.

Linux isn't perfect, and we should not delude our selves into thinking just because we run Linux nothing can hurt us. A typical Linux distribution has many pieces, and some of them are very complex, and many of them have never been audited for security.

However, Unix and therefore Linux does have some elements in the design that make it more secure out of the box, and Linux has learned a lot from the security failures of early Unix and Linuxes, so a modern Linux distro is potentially a secure platform at the core.

I strongly believe, that the only way to make many any system secure is to have proper skilled system administration, and this is where Windows on the whole is let down the most. It's a complex buggy system, that needs more, not less, time to look after than Linux/Unix. People think because Windows is GUI driven that monkeys can run it, and this is a major error.