Which database is more secure? Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server?

re: Which database is more secure? Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server?

KomatoZo — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:32:29 GMT

Actually compare "oracle" to "Microsoft SQL Server" is not very faint. But even in case we narrowed the search the results are quite overwhelming.

Which database is more secure? Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server?

Which database is more secure? Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server? — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 11:47:50 GMT

PingBack from http://business.ezineaerticles.com/which-database-is-more-secure-oracle-or-microsoft-sql-server/

More secure is not totally secure

Andrew Fryer's Blog — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 12:45:16 GMT

My good friend Steve the team spook, has written this post about SQL Servers track record on security

re: Which database is more secure? Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server?

Dave — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 14:01:42 GMT

Steve,

Not that I care who is more secure than who, but the basis of your theory is off

The Search on Secunia is pulling from the entire Oracle Product line vs just SQL Server. At this point you are comparing apples to oranges.

If you wanted to make an apples to apples comparison you would need to include MS Dynamics & CRM(Oracle Applications), IIS & Commerce Server (Oracle Application Server) Systems Center , Sharepoint/MOSS (Oracle Portal) and so on.

Even if you did an apples to apples comparison on Secunia I would not trust the results. For example, a search on Sharepoint shows 24 vulnerabilities, however a number of the advisories are for Symantec products.

I would recommend taking a look into the data in the future

re: Which database is more secure? Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server?

Nik — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 10:46:11 GMT

Of course it's Oracle; it's unbreakable. Haven't you read their website ads? :-)

re: Which database is more secure? Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server?

Rob — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 18:53:25 GMT

Of course, all software has vulnerabilities. Surely the more important issue is unpatched vulnerabilities, and how quickly the respective companies provide fixes? The method of counting vulnerabilities is fairly rubbish, because it skews the results - giving higher figures to more scrutinised software (open source work e.g. Firefox) and lower figures to less scrutinised software (Apple QuickTime for example). Of course, you could argue that the more scrutinised software is also more likely to be scrutinised by criminals and then exploited.