On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 04:19:43AM +0800, ChunMing Wu wrote:

> I'd be appreciated if you can tell me which one of 
> these operating systems is more secure in general and 
> why.

"Security isn't a tangible thing, it is applied psychology."

     Alec Muffett [author of "Crack"] 

In other words, either system in the hands of a moron will not be
secure. There is no such thing as "secure in general." You ought to do
some homework in order to refine your question, in particular how you
define the term "secure." I once wrote such a definition, and this is
what I came up with:

"Secure" should always be taken to mean "secure with regard to this   
installation, configured in this manner, against these possible
threats, as far as these data, operations or services are concerned,
as long these specific measures and practices are adopted and
maintained, according to the best of our knowledge of current	  
realities, and in light of all sorts of unforeseen and unforeseeable 
contingencies." The term never means more than this, and almost always
quite a bit less.

Don't take this as a blow-off; I'm sure if you frame specific
questions, in a way that shows you _have_ done some homework, you'll
get some responses here.


-- 
Bob Bernstein