Topic: Which operating system do you use? Windows? Linux? Mac? other? - page 13. (Read 15069 times)

linux

windows 7 64 bit, i actually used 32 bit when i didnt know that 64 is suitable for my pc

Windows 7 32 bit

 Windows is KNOWN to have security holes that M$ will not fix, due to the fact it would break backwards compatability if they DID try to fix them.

 Windows security is a pathetic JOKE.

 There are 3 reasons you see almost all trojans/viruses/etc written for Windows:

 1) There ARE a lot more Windows machines around.
 2) There are a LOT more vulnerabilities in Windows
 3) LINUX users tend to be a LOT more security concious on average than Windows users


 Hint - there are a LOT more Internet SERVERS that run LINUX than run Windows. There are 2 primary reasons for THAT (1) STABILITY (2) SECURITY

Most of my computers run Slackware LINUX - some of them are very old machines running older versions, but it gets the job done, they're dedicated single-function machines that never download anything, and they're behind a LINIX-based firewall so security on them isn't a major issue.

 I have 3 machines for gaming ONLY that run XP Sp3
 I have 1 machine for gaming running Windows 7, that will eventually probably replace one of the XP machines.

 If it wasn't for games, I'd be 100% LINUX by now - but some of the games I play do NOT play well with WINE if at all.

Windows 7 32 bit

I like the Kali linux, dont know but it can find the WPA2 and something else so it is basically wireless password

Windows is light years ahead of Linux in terms of security (but not privacy). Not only have they formally verified most of their kernel drivers to not crash the system over the past 5 years, but they have implemented every single OpenBSD stack protection including stack randomization, PIE, stack gap, W^X memory protection, and a slew of others and all of it is enabled by default. Kernel.org has these protections, but you have to manually enable them they are almost never on by default on any distro I've used. You also have to manually patch the system with GrSecurity/PaX in order to prevent serious udev priv escalation and get better memory read/write protections.

The only reason Linux appears more secure is that malware writers don't bother with it as it's such a tiny market share of desktops when deploying their bank credential sucking shitware. The vast majority of that shitware is enabled by Java applets, and Adobe insecurity. Remove those and your system won't easily be compromised. Every single time you hear of a "Java 0day" it's likely an applet exploit. Why the fuck Oracle doesn't simply deprecate and discontinue browser-side Java applet support nobody will ever know.

If you're using Linux for desktop first get the Linux Libre version of the kernel.org release removed of blobs, then patch it with grsec. Now you have to manually tinker with paxctl program flags to get Chromium to work but it's the only way to bring your system at par with Windows or OpenBSD default protections.

Of course you can always just use something like Qubes if you're a heavy bitcoin trader and wish to separate important things like credentials and wallets from each other, and from network facing daemons or browsers that can be exploited as you can spin up a new VM with Qubes on the fly.

Currently using Linux mint.

I'm using Windows XP now 

win 7 x64

Crunchbang Debian

win & linux

Windows 7

windows

I use windows 7.

Windows 7x64 on my PC  and  Windows 8.1 on my laptop

I'm using Windows 8.1 on my laptop, but sometimes I prefer Linux due to the fact that it is a more secure and faster OS.

I think you use kali linux for many thinks like finding the wifi passwords right?

I use Linux Deepin and Fedora as my main desktop operating systems, and
CentOS/Debian for servers. Deepin is really pretty and fits to my needs.

I really can't stand Windows for a number of reasons, but I shouldn't
get into that here.