SillyDog701

by **James** » Mon 05 Jul, 2004 2:47 pm

http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/ ... h=&nPage=1 :shock:

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040626 Firefox/0.9.1

by **Wellander** » Mon 05 Jul, 2004 3:04 pm

Hi,
Very nice.
It makes me feel better as a Windows user.
Though I do not believe in security.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8a1) Gecko/20040520

by **James** » Mon 05 Jul, 2004 3:21 pm

I'm skeptical by nature so I never quite bought into the all-bad Windows' scenario and the all-good Linux... all-good OS X claims. All systems are vulnerable and when a reputable security firm like Secunia reports with this somewhat shocking news, it makes you sit up and re-evaluate things.

btw: Why don't you believe in security, Wellander? I take all security reports seriously and I try and protect myself as best I can. I'm curious as to why you think the way you do? :?:

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040626 Firefox/0.9.1

by **Wellander** » Mon 05 Jul, 2004 4:14 pm

Hi,
I just do not believe in it.
It makes no secnce to me.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616

by **Don_HH2K** » Mon 05 Jul, 2004 4:19 pm

Wellander wrote:Hi,
I just do not believe in it.
It makes no secnce to me.

Well, in a sense, an insecure computer is similar to leaving your front door unlocked and posting it on the local news, the going out for a few days.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)

by **James** » Mon 05 Jul, 2004 5:52 pm

Hi Wellander

I'm still confused about your comments about security. Look at your own signature below:

"Micro$oft Insecure Exploiter is bad. It has many security issues..."

Is this just a sort of joke or do you really believe it?
btw: I don't mean to make any trouble. I'm just curious, that's all.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040626 Firefox/0.9.1

by **Mandrake** » Mon 05 Jul, 2004 8:13 pm

This article is great!

It shows that the talk of security in Linux and OS X is just FUD . . . !

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616

by **Wellander** » Tue 06 Jul, 2004 9:50 am

Hi,
Micro$oft releases patches and service packs I do not apply them.
There are firewalls oyut there I do not use them.
I do not beleive in security.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8a1) Gecko/20040520

by **James** » Tue 06 Jul, 2004 10:27 am

But Wellander... that's sort of like saying, "I don't believe in wearing my seatbelt... I don't believe in closing the bedroom door at night as a first defense against fire... I don't believe in keeping my social security information private... I don't believe in locking the doors and windows of my home or my car when I leave it unattended." These are security issues and I'm sure you would take steps to ensure that you were safe and your property was safely secured. By not downloading appropriate updates from MS (hey... I don't download ALL of them... just those that pertain to my own set-up) and not using a firewall you are essentially doing the very things you would not do in the above examples: letting online criminals break into your system. It's not a case of "not believing in security" but rather a case of closing your eyes to reality. I hope you change your mind before someone discovers your security holes and exploits them.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040626 Firefox/0.9.1

by **Wellander** » Tue 06 Jul, 2004 2:59 pm

Hi,
Do keep my self safe.
Computers is another issue.
I do not believe in those things for computers.
I have in the past had someone install programs in my computer through the Internet before.
I uninstalled them.
I also had someone delete some files in myt computer throught the Internet.
Good thing I had them backed up.
So people have had doen things before.
I still do not apply the patches nor install a firewall.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616

by **James** » Tue 06 Jul, 2004 8:22 pm

Well, Wellander, I hope you'll be okay. Seriously, I wouldn't want to see anyone hack into you and steal from you. I wish you well.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040626 Firefox/0.9.1

by **DJGM** » Tue 06 Jul, 2004 9:40 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you get a virus on a computer running a UNIX based or UNIX like OS,
that virus has to be given root access before it can even start to inflict any damage to the system.

At least that is what I assume after the reading the following on the LinuxISO.org forums . . .

pzatch wrote:I have never heard of a linux virus that was able to, on its own, Infect your system,
install itself, execute itself, then pass itself to the next system and start all over.
First it needs to get root access from you. You may make a mistake and run the
virus and give it root access but the next system down the line kills it.

Basicly M$ lets all this happen without any input from you. And now with their great
new line of activeX scripts you only need goto a webpage and poof your infected.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616

SillyDog701

Some Surprising Security Results that will shock...

Some Surprising Security Results that will shock...

Security?

Who is online