Secure Linux- Distros and Software

[Prsman]

No experience with any of these.

https://madaidans-insecurities.github.i ... ening.html

https://www.kicksecure.com/

https://www.whonix.org/

Most secure CPU is one not powered up.

[argentwolf]

https://madaidans-insecurities.github.i ... ening.html
https://www.kicksecure.com/
https://www.whonix.org/

Nice! The very first sentence in the 'Linux Hardening Guide' (first blind link above) is as insightful and honest as it gets: "Linux is not a secure operating system." [FULL STOP]
Now, we know just because the 'code' can be checked, doesn't actually mean anyone has.
There are some big claims to simply place ones trust on a popular's word. Does anyone have a list of "programmers" who've audited these privacy/security solutions, if not, why not? Trust is supposed to be earned. #TNO

[MikeNovember]

Hi,

Concerning security, not all Linux distros are equal.

- Some come with SELinux enhanced (Redhat and family), others with AppArmor (Debian, Ubuntu and family). SELinux is said more secure than AppArmor.

- Fedora Silverblue uses only flatpak applications; Ubuntu Core for IoT uses only snaps ones; Ubuntu intends to publish a desktop distro based only on snaps. Flatpaks and Snaps offer the best possible sandboxing of applications, with a strong isolation between applications and the operating system.

- Qubes OS allows running several operating systems, with a strong isolation between the systems. It does not bring any improvement to the intrinsic security of these operating systems.

- BSD and Free BSD are very secure, by the file system they use, and because, like with Apple macOS (based on BSD), the possibility of all operations is checked before the operation is done (an example, available free disk space is checked before to copy a file on a disk). It is possible to install a Linux over BSD or Free BSD, but that's not simple.

However, security is not only related to distro choice. You can read here viewtopic.php?t=397740 a "Security, Privacy and Anonymity in Linux Mint" Guide, showing how to strongly improve security on Linux Mint or Ubuntu.

Regards,

MN

[MurphCID]

Is BSD still run by anyone anymore? Not being a jerk, I just have not seen much about it, I know that Apple uses it as the base for Mac OS, but that is about it. Is Sony still using it as the base for the PlayStation OS?

[MurphCID]

Or do we have vulnerabilities or is it just that Microsoft and Apple have a larger attack profile due to installed user base?

It's not your mother's Linux.
https://truelist.co/blog/linux-statistics/

I suspect that my mother would never use a computer even if she had one available. My dad uses one, and complains constantly about it.

[mdiemer]

Re: BSD: The only time I was (knowingly) hacked was on a BSD system. I was on a composers forum, and went to get a cup of coffee or something. when I returned, a terminal was opened, and someone was typing the chroot command right before my eyes. I shut down immediately, then ran Dban, and nuked the drive.

how they did it I have no idea, but the forum had the Flash Player on it, something I had been trying to get them to get rid of, so perhaps that was it. fortunately, no damage was done. and eventually I persuaded the forum admin to upgrade the site. they were still on an old Ning version. Or maybe flash had nothing to do with it. Who knows, maybe it was a demon? I mean, the BSD mascot is...well you get the idea.

[karlchen]

<mod>
Removed some messages from this thread. Reason: The removed posts concentrated too much on telling negative details about some other forums, the names of which were mentioned as well. We do not want to bash other forums, do we.
</mod>

[mdiemer]

fine. Bye bye.

[The Muffin Man]

hmm... I'd be surprised at that, unless they came in on your X session or say, something like VNC.
If you were hacked, I doubt you would have seen any activity in a terminal since Linux (or BSD) since neither require a UI [like XTerm].