nope, they are as secure ;p security in linux is provided by the kernel, kernel is the same across all linux distros, however *BSD systems do have a different kernel because BSD systems arent actually a GNU/Linux systems but BSD systems. And ye they are quite good as server systems.
However, most of IT infrastructures runs RHEL because RedHat gives support. It is only linux that has such a "on-demand support".
BTW. NSA had chosen GNU/Linux to implement their MAC system(selinux). Linux won with FreeBSD at NSA +D
Why? It is great because normally when you have a bug in distro that causes some crashes in your system or even takes down whole system under some specific conditions all you can make is to report a bug and wait till some opensourcer will fix it. It may take half a year or more. That would be a mess for big corporations where hour of system-fault is biig amount of money.
idontknowwhy, im an emotional man, if u remember how linux/open source software was strugling in the beginings, and then here comes redhat and takes the money :P
Emotions are one, reality is the second thing. RedHat and Oracle are main sponsors of the growth of linux kernel. It is opensource, ofc, but RedHat and Oracle puts a really lot of money to make kernel better and better, without Oracle kernel would have never been optimized enough to handle huge Database traffic that takes place in todays big corporations. Which opensource'er would mind that Oracle DB has a one single variable that have 2TB of data possible and the kernel has to be optimized enough to handle it?
Without Oracle and RedHat the linux distros would be simply just same as FreeBSD for example, where 20developers takes care of whole system and every release. Nowdays there are thousand ppl that works on RedHat, and that what makes this system great - and still that is amazing, that RHEL is enterprise(you have to pay for it) but the CentOS is just a copy of RHEL but without support. So you can download for free and install on your desktop o CentOS which is just an a RHEL - the result of thousands of developers work which is a system that can handle todays biggest trafiics, totally for free :)
A quote to not be baseless:
" Olinux: Oracle defines as an internet and ecommerce company. Linux was born and is currently maintained via Internet. Are there any convergence/relation between Oracle internet strategy and a large deploy and support of linux platform?
Pradeep Banhot: Today according to IDC linux is more of a middle tier platform than a database platform. Oracle is working with distributors such as Red Hat to add database friendly features into Linux such as 4GB RAM support, raw I/O and 64-bit file addressing to make it a better third-tier OS. I expect Oracle to increase it's focus on Linux as a middle tier OS for it's internet based solutions. "
afaik u can get quite far with mysql/mariadb = no need for oracle :P true there is shitloasd of support for redhat but as i said im an emotianol person, if i cant fix it now, i will soon :P rather learn a new thing then let someone else fix it, if its a problem with the kernel, try to find a workaround and/or use a diff software.
if working for a huge company as a sys admin. tell them its my way or the high way, since as a sys admin i wouldnt be much of a sys admin if i couldnt fix what i need to run? :P or let anyone else (redhatsupport) fucks around with my secure system? would you?
i love linux because of the variaty it offers and so much diff ways to build a huge network, lets not forget about all the online documentation and the fact that its not money hungry bill gates microsfot windows.
also im not quite a big fan of centos aswell, im runing archlinux on my desktop and laptop and debian on all of my servers. but will switch to freebsd since i just noticed hetzner.de offers you a rescue system where u can install any OS you want :)
Haha. If you would ever look at kernels code. Nearly impossible to fix some bug while you are just a sysadmin, and not an a architect with several years of experience in the programming field. Or a genius. Applying a patch to kernel is a Grall for geeks.. 2 programmers suicided after the Linus Torvalds didnt apply their patch that they were working on for long time.....
Sometimes you cant use different soft. Without redhat and oracle most likely the linux kernel would be in condition that it was several years ago. Noone opensource developers could keep up the changes in hardware. Linux can handle biiiiiiiiiiiig arrays of SSD disks. But do you really think that this was applied by some sysadmin opensourcer who thinks he is great so he implements a ssd array function to kernel???? No. Oracle came to red hat and told: Hey we have ssd's now, you better make the kernel able to handle up to 1000ssd disks for several million dollars because I/O operations for databases will be much faster. (If ssds handling would have to be added only for desktop users who wants system to boot fast then i doubt kernel would be able to handle it nowdays, i think). Kernel and linux world is too complicated for "emotions" and "i am a true sysadmin!". Too much money, too much to loose with your ambitions ;)
Well every system will have bugs regardless if you have redhat support or not,if its buged its buged but thers plenty of work arounds that can be implemented on any system you just have to think out of the box, i fixed so many problems i had with my servers and till this day i still have no idea how i did it, or runing a broken pc for ower a year while it doesnt even wanna boot :D without problems there wouldnt be a thing called evolution. pretty much evertyhing can be done if your are willing to spend your time and keep a calm and disciplined mind-set. problems is the idiotism leaving the body :)
systems will always be bugged redhat bsd or ubuntu, stuff just wont work. it is always ben like that and always will be, if you look back in time, in the early dev. stages of the linux, ppl didnt get paid to do it, and how much it was bugged, also u can blame it on kernel for not supporting the ssd drives, but why dont u blame the ssd drives for not supporting the system?
and why is that the redhat is the only system that prowides support (this sentance is not true becaseu every other linux distro provides support on demand and 90% of the time its free)on demand? because ur paying for it
there is loads of ppl who are paid to fix the bugs, but dont forget there is much more coders who do that for free.
sorry seareal, you seem to not have any knowledge at all.
"Well every system will have bugs regardless if you have redhat support or not,"
but bug in redhat will be fixed immediately, in other opensource distros it will be fixed when a developer will have a good day, and he decided in the evening to fix some bug. Imagine this:
A BSD developer look at "what to do" list and he see there "Ohh 4 weeks ago Oracle report a big bug that causes their new DB release to crash, oh well, they are loosing only 500thousand dollars per day, well I will take care of it tomorrow cause I have to go out with friends tonight, or I call mark so maybe he is in home atm!".
" also u can blame it on kernel for not supporting the ssd drives, but why dont u blame the ssd drives for not supporting the system?"
I didnt say that linux doesnt support ssd's, it supports, but it supports it because the true it world just need it to minimize the I/O bottlneck in their applications, not because you wanted your ubuntu to boot fast... understand it:)
red hat, oracle and other huge companies whose services are based on linux systems are the main reason of Kernel development. Even Linus Torvalds doesnst have much to say when Oracle comes to him and told that "this must be implemented in new kernel mr. Linus".
And big companies thinks like this: We can buy this RHEL and have professional support that fix for us each bug, or we can take CentOS, give work to 20Seareals who thinks that they can even fix a bug in kernel and when a bug occured we will be waiting weeks when seareal thought will get "out of the box" and he fixes it!! it doesnt matter that we lost 2 weeks and big $$$$. Most important are seareals ambitions :) And on the end, companies do have a choice, they can choose CentOS, Ubuntu, Debian etc without that support, or choose RHEL. Something must be cool about rhel if most of the companies do actually choose rhel... :)
I guess he is crazy about me, still thinking I am a cheater or something xD because I didn't play on UAC. So what I played for 3(?) years on SLAC/TZAC, played on lans etc I'm still a cheater because of that :D
ur welcome
RHCSA bitch
also i think its the preferance of the countries, since im pretty sure sweden is got almost everything runing on openbsd
However, most of IT infrastructures runs RHEL because RedHat gives support. It is only linux that has such a "on-demand support".
BTW. NSA had chosen GNU/Linux to implement their MAC system(selinux). Linux won with FreeBSD at NSA +D
wait what, nsa had created a hybrid betwen mac and nix?
i tougt mac is for kids who dont know better?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_access_control
thats whatu ment by MAC LOL ROFLMAO #HASHTAG
i was going like wtf mac & nix & nsa wtf
Without Oracle and RedHat the linux distros would be simply just same as FreeBSD for example, where 20developers takes care of whole system and every release. Nowdays there are thousand ppl that works on RedHat, and that what makes this system great - and still that is amazing, that RHEL is enterprise(you have to pay for it) but the CentOS is just a copy of RHEL but without support. So you can download for free and install on your desktop o CentOS which is just an a RHEL - the result of thousands of developers work which is a system that can handle todays biggest trafiics, totally for free :)
A quote to not be baseless:
" Olinux: Oracle defines as an internet and ecommerce company. Linux was born and is currently maintained via Internet. Are there any convergence/relation between Oracle internet strategy and a large deploy and support of linux platform?
Pradeep Banhot: Today according to IDC linux is more of a middle tier platform than a database platform. Oracle is working with distributors such as Red Hat to add database friendly features into Linux such as 4GB RAM support, raw I/O and 64-bit file addressing to make it a better third-tier OS. I expect Oracle to increase it's focus on Linux as a middle tier OS for it's internet based solutions. "
quite old because of 4GB RAM but still :)
if working for a huge company as a sys admin. tell them its my way or the high way, since as a sys admin i wouldnt be much of a sys admin if i couldnt fix what i need to run? :P or let anyone else (redhatsupport) fucks around with my secure system? would you?
i love linux because of the variaty it offers and so much diff ways to build a huge network, lets not forget about all the online documentation and the fact that its not money hungry bill gates microsfot windows.
also im not quite a big fan of centos aswell, im runing archlinux on my desktop and laptop and debian on all of my servers. but will switch to freebsd since i just noticed hetzner.de offers you a rescue system where u can install any OS you want :)
Sometimes you cant use different soft. Without redhat and oracle most likely the linux kernel would be in condition that it was several years ago. Noone opensource developers could keep up the changes in hardware. Linux can handle biiiiiiiiiiiig arrays of SSD disks. But do you really think that this was applied by some sysadmin opensourcer who thinks he is great so he implements a ssd array function to kernel???? No. Oracle came to red hat and told: Hey we have ssd's now, you better make the kernel able to handle up to 1000ssd disks for several million dollars because I/O operations for databases will be much faster. (If ssds handling would have to be added only for desktop users who wants system to boot fast then i doubt kernel would be able to handle it nowdays, i think). Kernel and linux world is too complicated for "emotions" and "i am a true sysadmin!". Too much money, too much to loose with your ambitions ;)
Well every system will have bugs regardless if you have redhat support or not,if its buged its buged but thers plenty of work arounds that can be implemented on any system you just have to think out of the box, i fixed so many problems i had with my servers and till this day i still have no idea how i did it, or runing a broken pc for ower a year while it doesnt even wanna boot :D without problems there wouldnt be a thing called evolution. pretty much evertyhing can be done if your are willing to spend your time and keep a calm and disciplined mind-set. problems is the idiotism leaving the body :)
systems will always be bugged redhat bsd or ubuntu, stuff just wont work. it is always ben like that and always will be, if you look back in time, in the early dev. stages of the linux, ppl didnt get paid to do it, and how much it was bugged, also u can blame it on kernel for not supporting the ssd drives, but why dont u blame the ssd drives for not supporting the system?
and why is that the redhat is the only system that prowides support (this sentance is not true becaseu every other linux distro provides support on demand and 90% of the time its free)on demand? because ur paying for it
there is loads of ppl who are paid to fix the bugs, but dont forget there is much more coders who do that for free.
"Well every system will have bugs regardless if you have redhat support or not,"
but bug in redhat will be fixed immediately, in other opensource distros it will be fixed when a developer will have a good day, and he decided in the evening to fix some bug. Imagine this:
A BSD developer look at "what to do" list and he see there "Ohh 4 weeks ago Oracle report a big bug that causes their new DB release to crash, oh well, they are loosing only 500thousand dollars per day, well I will take care of it tomorrow cause I have to go out with friends tonight, or I call mark so maybe he is in home atm!".
" also u can blame it on kernel for not supporting the ssd drives, but why dont u blame the ssd drives for not supporting the system?"
I didnt say that linux doesnt support ssd's, it supports, but it supports it because the true it world just need it to minimize the I/O bottlneck in their applications, not because you wanted your ubuntu to boot fast... understand it:)
red hat, oracle and other huge companies whose services are based on linux systems are the main reason of Kernel development. Even Linus Torvalds doesnst have much to say when Oracle comes to him and told that "this must be implemented in new kernel mr. Linus".
And big companies thinks like this: We can buy this RHEL and have professional support that fix for us each bug, or we can take CentOS, give work to 20Seareals who thinks that they can even fix a bug in kernel and when a bug occured we will be waiting weeks when seareal thought will get "out of the box" and he fixes it!! it doesnt matter that we lost 2 weeks and big $$$$. Most important are seareals ambitions :) And on the end, companies do have a choice, they can choose CentOS, Ubuntu, Debian etc without that support, or choose RHEL. Something must be cool about rhel if most of the companies do actually choose rhel... :)
most of those guys
If you have a nerd question, pm YMCA'Marcus.
ty kenzi
+ my fav quote
:DDD
lol xd