What is the difference between Linux and BSD?

[dreaded_beast]

The following article list Max OS X and BSD as the most secure OSes for computers continuously hooked-up to the Internet. Linux however, was listed as one that hacked into quite frequently.

http://it.slashdot.org/it/04/11/02/1722237.shtml?tid=172&tid=179&tid=190

So, what is the difference between Linux and BSD

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

The following article list Max OS X and BSD as the most secure OSes for computers continuously hooked-up to the Internet. Linux however, was listed as one that hacked into quite frequently.

http://it.slashdot.org/it/04/11/02/1722237.shtml?tid=172&tid=179&tid=190

So, what is the difference between Linux and BSD

How detailed do you want to get?

Short answer -- BSD was an offshoot of the original AT&T Unix, with a couple sub-flavors essentially re-written with security as a top level priority. Linux was started as a project by Linus Torvalds to provide an alternative Unix-like kernel for experimentation and such. It kind of took on a life of its own, and to a great extent jumpstarted the open source movement.

Properly configured, there probably isn't a lot of difference between one or the other in terms of security, and either is head and shoulders above Windows in terms of out-of-the-box security. If you don't have a lot of experience, BSD would be probably better as a 'fire and forget' box. Most of the popular Linux distros now have better installation routines that guide you through setting up Internet servers and such, and do a pretty good job of setting up a secure box, so it's not as big a difference as it used to be.

No machine left unmonitored and unpatched in the Internet is immune, though. If you give people a way in, even if it is only serving webpages or what have you, you've got to keep up to date and aware of new security risks, etc.

A properly configured and maintained box, be it Windows, BSD, Unix, or whatever, is a manageable risk. The interesting point of the article, though, is that they are discussing manual hacking attempts. The real differentiation between Windows and the *nixes is that Windows is far more vulnerable to automatic attacks (worms, trojans, etc).

 

[Sigurd]

Linux & BSD

I would add to Rodrigo's description that the couple of flavours of BSD are very popular with Web Servers and internet providers. Most of the serious networking mainstays have flavours for both OSs.

I think BSD lovers would say that BSD is more concentrated with more unified software selection and greater attention to security.

Linux advocates would probably point out that there is ALOT more work being done on Linux. That Linux is the fastest evolving kernel in the world and that you have a comparable security situation and a whole lot more choice.

If your demands of the OS are straight forward either will probably get the job done. You'll likely find more variety and more recent updates for Linux right now though and they're both free to download. Debian, with its central code repositories is my current favourite Linux.

Sigurd

 

[Rackhir]

Another big difference is in the licensing terms. Linux is more difficult to make money with as you are obliged by the GPL to make the source code for what you've done available.

BSD on the other hand, you can keep proprietary any changes you have made to the source code. This is probably the main reason Apple went with BSD instead of Linux for the core of OSX.