Linux security; Gnome and KDE scrutinized.

Yesterday I've read an interesting article on linux security related to enhanced functionality offered by DE's like Gnome and KDE.
It's called How to write a Linux virus in 5 easy steps and can be found here.

This post/thread isn't meant for OMG Linux suckz and is insecure hysteria but instead aimed at discussing the ongoing development of the DE functionalities and their possible implications.
I would ask everyone interested to read the article and give your opinion whether you think added functionalities (automatic opening of email attachments by DE launchers as described in the article) in desktop environments like Gnome and KDE outweight the possible risks that come along with it.
Do you think the author has a valid argument? Exaggerated or perhaps underrated the issue at hand?
Cheers.

P.S.
Mods, the linked webpage does NOT contain ANY information on how to write a virus, contrary to it's title.

 

Nice find! I always agreed that although Linux is more secure than Windows, it should not be completely secure, because no system is fully secure.

Funny that the devs of Fedora said "this is expected behaviour". Sounds a whole lot like Microsoft, doesn't it?

 

Yep, I 'somehow' got that " It's not a bug, it's a feature" feeling...

 

I still prefer using Windows with all the anti-virus, firewall and sandboxing protection I can get to using Linux and trusting the "Linux is impenetrable" word that goes around. But I can understand why system administrators in charge of hundreds of computers would prefer Linux, I'd do the same.

 

Well, you do know that Linux has iptables(firewall) and anti virus programs as well. So why not run Linux with these additions?

 

Because I'm really used to Windows. BUT I do have an Ubuntu installed to practice C programming. And I use Linux at work...

 

Linux anti-virus software is a bit of a misnomer. They only seek Windows viruses, as the whole anti-virus approach is not really applicable to linux. Software protection for linux deals almost entirely with access policy controls. SELinux is one such thing. I don't believe those measures are necessary for a tightly kept workstation system, though. A linux box with just a simple wm (read: no intrusive DE), no remotely accessible server functions, and a one-way no-frills firewall is much more secure than a windows box can be. The biggest security risk would be X Server, which runs as a root process. That weakness can be mitigated easily by dropping down to runlevel 3.

Anti-virus is a condom that doesn't always work.

 

half a year ago there was a hack to intel drivers which allowed to run X as a non-root process.

then why not drop to the safest runlevel, I mean runlevel 0 ?

 

Brilliant! Now I will never be bothered by ha... OH SHI-

 

Baserk....nice find, I shall read it!