Microsoft has come up with it's own special distro of Linux. It's not something you or I will be using any time soon, but it has been in place in the Azure Cloud for quite a while. It runs on a custom designed chip and is targeted at controlling all those gizmos running what we know as the Internet of Things, IoT. The news today is that Microsoft is offering $100,000 to any hacker that can breach the security of the system. This Bug Bounty has been in place for quite a while in regard to the basic Azure platform, but now they are specifically looking for hacks into their Linux OS that is running on Azure. Microsoft may have missed the mobile device boat, but it is light years ahead of the competition when it comes to IoT.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/6/21249 ... ty-hacking
More On Micorsoft Linux
Re: More On Micorsoft Linux
Actually, it would be great if they came up with a Linux based Distro that is 100% secure. But I think they are more geared to doing everything on-line now, so users don't have their own programs, only those they can access through a browser.
And of course, they will charge a monthly fee to use their services and programs.
Now that Android has gained a foothold, one heck of a lot of hackers are now looking at Linux based systems, and gaining some headway. On Android devices they can now get to all of your personal information, including banking, credit cards, and many other things. OR put this way Android is giving Linux a bad name, hi hi.
Unfortunately, Android has a zillion more holes in it than Windows ever did. Not good Yogi, not good.
And of course, they will charge a monthly fee to use their services and programs.
Now that Android has gained a foothold, one heck of a lot of hackers are now looking at Linux based systems, and gaining some headway. On Android devices they can now get to all of your personal information, including banking, credit cards, and many other things. OR put this way Android is giving Linux a bad name, hi hi.
Unfortunately, Android has a zillion more holes in it than Windows ever did. Not good Yogi, not good.
Re: More On Micorsoft Linux
My opinion is that Linux, defined as being only the kernel, is fairly well developed and mature. As such it enjoys that legendary security Linux people like to brag about. But, as I like to point out, the Linux kernel is about as useless as the Windows kernel stand alone. It only becomes useful when you attach enough peripheral software and hardware to make it usable by humans. That's where the security differences become glaringly clear. Windows is pretty well hardened given all the experience it has defending itself from bad actors. Linux suffers on two counts. Only in recent years have hackers decided it's worth creating Linux attack vectors for mobile, and incidentally workstations. There are vulnerabilities up the Yin Yang that need addressing in Linux operating systems, which brings me to my second point. Because it is Free and Open Source Software there is no control over development as you would see in large corporations such as Microsoft, Apple, or Google. Many people contribute to the final product release from the big three, but nobody is independently developing anything. They must answer to The Man for any mistakes, which is an unknown concept in Linux developer circles. How many times have you read about a problem being "upstream" and thus the current operating system developer washes his/her hands of the matter? That cant happen in the big companies.
I believe this entry into the Linux world by Microsoft clearly shows they feel the future is in the cloud. You have pointed out many times that the server world is the domain ruled by Linux. Those Azure Cloud Servers can now be run on a Linux platform if you buy them from Microsoft. That is why they are so highly focused on security. Their business is the Cloud and they don't want that to end up like the buggy desktop environment they left behind. It's a smart business move because Microsoft figures guys like you and me are in the minority and will disappear by attrition. They are right, of course. And, as far as charging for the software they make, that's a given. It's how they make their money and always has been. What I'd like to see is some distro of Linux that is FOSS and bulletproof. I have no hope for that, but I think Microsoft is almost there.
I believe this entry into the Linux world by Microsoft clearly shows they feel the future is in the cloud. You have pointed out many times that the server world is the domain ruled by Linux. Those Azure Cloud Servers can now be run on a Linux platform if you buy them from Microsoft. That is why they are so highly focused on security. Their business is the Cloud and they don't want that to end up like the buggy desktop environment they left behind. It's a smart business move because Microsoft figures guys like you and me are in the minority and will disappear by attrition. They are right, of course. And, as far as charging for the software they make, that's a given. It's how they make their money and always has been. What I'd like to see is some distro of Linux that is FOSS and bulletproof. I have no hope for that, but I think Microsoft is almost there.
Re: More On Micorsoft Linux
I agree on all of your points Yogi!
But on the side of security, Red Hat has done a remarkable job of closing any back doors.
But they too are a proprietary company.
I may be wrong, but the actual Red Hat programming is not open source, although some of it is and offered as CentOS.
None of their fixes are included with CentOS as far as I know.
I used CentOS for a while, but liked Ubuntu better, and also Mint, and since both of those were built on Debian, I started using Debian because it would run fast on my older computers.
As far as the business folks I talk to, they are sorta like me, don't want to trust their data to the cloud, unless it is their own cloud, hi hi.
IBM spent like 35 billion bucks to buy out Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Oracle used both Red Hat and Solaris to develop their own Oracle Linux OS geared to their cloud.
And from what I hear, security is job one by both IBM and Oracle.
Don't know if it is true or not, but I heard Micro$oft bought Canonical and my dump Ubuntu for their new Windows L OS.
Windows L stand for Windows Linux OS of course. Supposedly it will look and feel like windows, and they hope it will bring more folks back to using Windows. We'll see!
But on the side of security, Red Hat has done a remarkable job of closing any back doors.
But they too are a proprietary company.
I may be wrong, but the actual Red Hat programming is not open source, although some of it is and offered as CentOS.
None of their fixes are included with CentOS as far as I know.
I used CentOS for a while, but liked Ubuntu better, and also Mint, and since both of those were built on Debian, I started using Debian because it would run fast on my older computers.
As far as the business folks I talk to, they are sorta like me, don't want to trust their data to the cloud, unless it is their own cloud, hi hi.
IBM spent like 35 billion bucks to buy out Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Oracle used both Red Hat and Solaris to develop their own Oracle Linux OS geared to their cloud.
And from what I hear, security is job one by both IBM and Oracle.
Don't know if it is true or not, but I heard Micro$oft bought Canonical and my dump Ubuntu for their new Windows L OS.
Windows L stand for Windows Linux OS of course. Supposedly it will look and feel like windows, and they hope it will bring more folks back to using Windows. We'll see!