ZDNet is running an article about an insurance company charging five to fifteen percent more for their "hacker" insurance if a company uses Windows NT in their internet operations. Now, as anyone that knows me knows, I think NT sucks. Especially when the subject is serving up soem web pages. But the reality is, even though the default NT installation is about as secure as a pair of wet noodle hand cuffs, someone who knows what they're doing can turn an NT box a mighty secure machine. The inverse is also true- someone who doesn't know what they're doing can set up a Linux/ Solaris/ Whateverix machine that could be taken down quick, fast, in a hurry (Flavor vision ain't blurry.) So, as much as it pains me philosophically to say it, the real onus is on the quality of the people running the operation and not the flavor of the software.