(untitled)

Hey /sec/, I have a somewhat specific question and I'm looking for your personal knowledge or experience on the topic. I'm not posting in the simple security questions thread because I am almost certain some flame will follow and wouldn't want to litter that thread. How much better off is a person by using stock ubuntu instead of stock windows, security and privacy-wise? I expect it to be much better security-wise as its harder to catch malware, full disk encryption is easy, stuff like that. Privacy-wise I'm interested both in how much it helps avoiding passive and active surveillance, with or without the use of proprietary software. I am absolutely uninterested in recommendations for any other distro whatsoever, if you fail to resist recommending one anyway I'll take it as a sign that you didn't read or are unable to comprehend the thread. I am also aware that ubuntu isn't the Snowden Privacy Distro Of The Year(tm), so please refrain from pointing that out; I'm interested in a comparison with windows on the security side as well, not in its ability to hide you from NSA backdoors inside your brain. Thank you. (Picture is illustration only.)

>>6250 It guarantees you better endpoint security if your threat model includes state actors with the ability to pressure Microsoft. But fundamentally the architecture of cell networks and internet, http , are not designed to be resilient to pervasive serveilance, and additional measure must be taken to protect against these additional threats.

>How much better off is a person by using stock ubuntu instead of stock windows, security and privacy-wise? They're both pretty secure if you aren't executing malware. Windows is a privacy black hole. MS has pushed numerous updates that reset user privacy settings. They added a feature to send system searches to Bing and then improved it by removing the option to disable it.