• BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    There are no anti social engineering security measurements in Linux, for instance. Just sodo and break anything and everything.

    Windows gives you a UAC prompt or needs one to run a cmd prompt as admin, both of which are functionally the same as sudo…

    Windows is being bombarded by malware every second of every day. Linux, with its 6% of desktop user market share - not so much.

    But, to circle back to the core statement. Yes it is. And Linux holds steadfast.

    • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      They’re very much not, that’s the point. There are things that require the NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM account permissions. Admin can do a lot in Windows, but not everything.

      EDIT: also, Windows throws the UAC prompt around much less than Linux asks for the root permissions. ANY software update on Linux needs root. Even regular users are starting to get that if they see the UAC prompt, something big is about to happen.

      • toothpaste_sandwich@thebrainbin.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 minutes ago

        You do have a point—Linux does not warn users against running superuser commands constantly and naggingly. Also not the beginner-friendly distros like Zorin, Mint and Ubuntu (as far as I know).

        To me that’s fine, because I know not to just run any command, but my grandma who gets an email from a trustworthy-sounding person telling them to run “sudo install this keyboard logger and Rustdesk scripted installer” will not know better.

        So then that begs the question, given you seem to know something about it: how should this be addressed? (I assume you know something about this—I don’t even know what an UAC prompt is.)