Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not addLinux next? Linux is virusware. - Linux

This is a discussion on Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not addLinux next? Linux is virusware. - Linux ; "chrisv" wrote in message news:029tn3l6ddl1j4dlamu6475fssd9vs2dg6@4ax.com... > rat wrote: > >> (snip ignorant bull****) > > You're an ignorant, lying fsckwit, rat. > And you are a zero or even negative asset for your keeper....

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 132

Thread: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not addLinux next? Linux is virusware.

  1. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.


    "chrisv" wrote in message
    news:029tn3l6ddl1j4dlamu6475fssd9vs2dg6@4ax.com...
    > rat wrote:
    >
    >> (snip ignorant bull****)

    >
    > You're an ignorant, lying fsckwit, rat.
    >

    And you are a zero or even negative asset for your keeper.


  2. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.


    "Peter Köhlmann" wrote in message
    news:flm28o$hh$00$3@news.t-online.com...
    > amicus_curious wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "Rick" wrote in message
    >> news:13nsriingnqjk3e@news.supernews.com...
    >>>

    >
    > < snip billwg idiocy >
    >
    >>>> Further, since
    >>>> Linux OS kernel is open-source, a hacker can disquise the virus to
    >>>> become an integral part of the OS--and no virus checker (not that Linux
    >>>> has any virus checkers, that's how primitive it is) can spot it.
    >>>
    >>> How would they propagate that virus laden kernel?
    >>>

    >> New versions are coming out lickety-split and patches are frequent. Hide
    >> it in there and after a short while everyone will have it.

    >
    > So knowledge how linux kernels are distributed / maintained is another
    > thing
    > you know absolutely nothing about
    >
    > What a surprise...
    > --

    ..Oh I bet I could go to the next Linux fair or whatever and hand out
    thousands of DVDs that looked just like some popular distro and they would
    go into service immediately. Ever been to a trade show?

    And it wouldn't even have to be the kernel, of course, just any utility
    likely to be used eventually. You twits only think you are safe.


  3. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.


    wrote in message
    news:lbj255-2fi.ln1@tux.glaci.com...
    > amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> Maybe, maybe not. For example lets design some kind of low profile
    >> Trojan
    >> such as is often alleged to be infecting Windows machines. Since it is
    >> so
    >> low profile, the user is unaware of its existence. Now put that code in
    >> the
    >> binary distribution but do not show the source in any source
    >> distribution.
    >> If someone recompiles the distribution from the source, then the Trojan
    >> is
    >> lost, but what percentage of Linux users actually do any of that? If
    >> someone were to compare the size and signature of each and every file in
    >> the
    >> distribution before and after a recompile, then the problem might be
    >> noticed, but I think that is a rare thing and so a worm or the like could
    >> hide in Linux indefinitely.

    >
    > OK, so how exactly do we 'put that code in the binary distribution'?
    > Last I checked, the Ubuntu and Fedora projects are not handing out
    > root access to their servers to just anyone, and the build process
    > includes generation of checksums for the ISO image. Unless you are
    > suggesting the distro providers themselves are infecting their code.
    >

    Well I was talking to a guy who is a security advisor over in Sweden who was
    at the Microsoft TechEd conference this spring and he did just that. It
    wasn't a Linux distribution, but it was a complementary software package
    that he handed out to a target set of visitors as part of a test assault on
    a brokerage company over there. The IT guys might not have run the stuff,
    he said, but the sales guys will do it in an instant.

    If I were the mythical Microsoft evil genius bent on embarassing, say,
    Ubuntu, I could arrange to produce and casually distribute a lot of DVDs
    that looked like the real thing but were not. Consider all the people here
    who talk of handing out these LiveCDs to influence Window users to switch.
    Do you know where that DVD has been?

    > In that case even recompiling the code is not a perfect fix, because
    > the binary of the compiler might be infected to silently insert
    > backdoors into your apps as you compile them, including the compiler
    > itself when you recompile it from source. I think it was Kernighan
    > or perhaps Ritchie of C fame that first suggested this approach, and
    > I curse him for putting the evil thought in my head. >
    >
    > Seriously though, the risk of that sort of thing is vanishingly
    > small, and your risks are still much higher with closed source
    > code if only because non malicious bugs are more likely to
    > slip through. That whole many eyes thing you know...
    >

    How many are actually looking?


  4. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add ?Linux next? Linux is virusware.


    wrote in message
    news:4ce255-bef.ln1@tux.glaci.com...
    > Rick wrote:
    >> They might, but it would be easily seen and fixed.
    >>> Further, since
    >>> Linux OS kernel is open-source, a hacker can disquise the virus to
    >>> become an integral part of the OS--and no virus checker (not that Linux
    >>> has any virus checkers, that's how primitive it is) can spot it.

    >>
    >> How would they propagate that virus laden kernel?

    >
    > Exactly. Just because you know how to hide an exploit in the
    > Linux kernel does not mean it will be accepted into the official
    > kernel tree. There is actually a rather rigorous peer review
    > and vetting of patches before they are accepted.
    >
    > In all my time on the Linux Kernel Mailing List, I've only seen
    > one example of what might have been an attempted maliceous patch.
    > It had a test condition using '=' instead of '==' to always
    > assign a value instead of just examining it, possible privilege
    > escalation being the result. It was rejected rather quickly.
    > I could easily imagine something like it slipping through in
    > a closed source environment where fewer people are reviewing the
    > code.
    >

    Well by now I am sure the answer is clear to you, but in case you haven't
    read the other posts, the exploit doesn't have to be in the kernel and the
    kernel or other file may not have come from Linus himself. It's just a boot
    CD/DVD, eh, that says its Ubuntu or something and it runs Linux just fine
    only it has a Trojan buried in there somewhere ready to wake up and smell
    the coffee.


  5. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add ?Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com wrote:

    > amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> Nothing of any consequence, though. The real problem is that users do
    >> not
    >> apply available fixes and that isn't limited to Windows users. The Linux
    >> patch system is pretty clumsy and ineffective in reaching affected users.

    >
    > Eh? Apt and RPM based distros automatically get updates from their
    > repository systems and have for years. Unlike Windows Update, the
    > Linux system handles ALL the software, including third party software
    > accepted into the repository and vendor repositories added to the
    > source list. This is all handled automatically, seamlessly, with
    > all dependencies sorted out and never a reboot needed accept when
    > a kernel version changes.
    >
    > Furthermore, you can even do complete version upgrades this way. I
    > recently upgraded an Ubuntu 7.04 system to 7.10 remotely, over the
    > Internet, from more than 1000 miles away actually. It was as simple
    > as pointing the system at the new apt repository and issuing the
    > upgrade command (or just a mouse click if I had been at the console).
    >
    > What exactly is 'clumsy' or 'ineffective' about that?


    Nothing at all. It's just Bill Weisgerber doing his shill service for M$.

    --
    : It takes time, this. One slight error in any of my thirteen billion
    calculations and we'll be blasted to smithereens. Here we go, then: 10, 9,
    8, 6, 5--
    Holly, *where's* 7?
    --Red Dwarf--

  6. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add ?Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 14:32:09 -0600,
    thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com wrote:
    > amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> Nothing of any consequence, though. The real problem is that users do not
    >> apply available fixes and that isn't limited to Windows users. The Linux
    >> patch system is pretty clumsy and ineffective in reaching affected users.

    >
    > Eh? Apt and RPM based distros automatically get updates from their
    > repository systems and have for years. Unlike Windows Update, the
    > Linux system handles ALL the software, including third party software
    > accepted into the repository and vendor repositories added to the
    > source list. This is all handled automatically, seamlessly, with
    > all dependencies sorted out and never a reboot needed accept when
    > a kernel version changes.
    >
    > Furthermore, you can even do complete version upgrades this way. I
    > recently upgraded an Ubuntu 7.04 system to 7.10 remotely, over the
    > Internet, from more than 1000 miles away actually. It was as simple
    > as pointing the system at the new apt repository and issuing the
    > upgrade command (or just a mouse click if I had been at the console).


    we just bumped a bunch of systems from CentOS 4 to CentOS 5 with no
    problems. Remotely, including the required (due to kernel changes)
    reboots.

    > What exactly is 'clumsy' or 'ineffective' about that?
    >
    > Thad



    well, you see *not* being able to update all the installed software on a
    given machine is less cumbersome than being able to. Or something...
    amicus doesn't make a lot of sense on this one.



    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHfs8Wd90bcYOAWPYRApIsAJoCAvxUgfwTLY12BdTMMY sANKy5bACeJnpl
    gHyO5/0WaSJUwNgUUmm2o1A=
    =cfRF
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    Good judgement comes with experience. Unfortunately, the experience
    usually comes from bad judgement.

  7. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add ?Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    amicus_curious wrote:

    >
    > wrote in message
    > news:4ce255-bef.ln1@tux.glaci.com...
    >> Rick wrote:
    >>> They might, but it would be easily seen and fixed.
    >>>> Further, since
    >>>> Linux OS kernel is open-source, a hacker can disquise the virus to
    >>>> become an integral part of the OS--and no virus checker (not that Linux
    >>>> has any virus checkers, that's how primitive it is) can spot it.
    >>>
    >>> How would they propagate that virus laden kernel?

    >>
    >> Exactly. Just because you know how to hide an exploit in the
    >> Linux kernel does not mean it will be accepted into the official
    >> kernel tree. There is actually a rather rigorous peer review
    >> and vetting of patches before they are accepted.
    >>
    >> In all my time on the Linux Kernel Mailing List, I've only seen
    >> one example of what might have been an attempted maliceous patch.
    >> It had a test condition using '=' instead of '==' to always
    >> assign a value instead of just examining it, possible privilege
    >> escalation being the result. It was rejected rather quickly.
    >> I could easily imagine something like it slipping through in
    >> a closed source environment where fewer people are reviewing the
    >> code.
    >>

    > Well by now I am sure the answer is clear to you, but in case you haven't
    > read the other posts, the exploit doesn't have to be in the kernel and the
    > kernel or other file may not have come from Linus himself. It's just a
    > boot CD/DVD, eh, that says its Ubuntu or something and it runs Linux just
    > fine only it has a Trojan buried in there somewhere ready to wake up and
    > smell the coffee.


    Translation: You made it up. Completely
    --
    You're not my type. For that matter, you're not even my species


  8. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 18:37:50 -0500,
    amicus_curious wrote:
    >
    > "Peter Köhlmann" wrote in message
    > news:flm28o$hh$00$3@news.t-online.com...
    >> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "Rick" wrote in message
    >>> news:13nsriingnqjk3e@news.supernews.com...
    >>>>

    >>
    >> < snip billwg idiocy >
    >>
    >>>>> Further, since
    >>>>> Linux OS kernel is open-source, a hacker can disquise the virus to
    >>>>> become an integral part of the OS--and no virus checker (not that Linux
    >>>>> has any virus checkers, that's how primitive it is) can spot it.
    >>>>
    >>>> How would they propagate that virus laden kernel?
    >>>>
    >>> New versions are coming out lickety-split and patches are frequent. Hide
    >>> it in there and after a short while everyone will have it.

    >>
    >> So knowledge how linux kernels are distributed / maintained is another
    >> thing
    >> you know absolutely nothing about
    >>
    >> What a surprise...
    >> --

    > .Oh I bet I could go to the next Linux fair or whatever and hand out
    > thousands of DVDs that looked just like some popular distro and they would
    > go into service immediately. Ever been to a trade show?
    >
    > And it wouldn't even have to be the kernel, of course, just any utility
    > likely to be used eventually. You twits only think you are safe.
    >



    and this has what to do with open source? since that was the discussion
    in hand.

    your attack listed above works for both open and closed source, and is
    not a differentiator between them. Please try again.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHftITd90bcYOAWPYRAveaAKDM3A9db8aNFKsUS8Y/9a96g31RsQCffeNb
    dbn5ayJYMkIcSw6HjAmJiJ4=
    =bxI9
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    The New York Times, the paper that asks for more verification from it's
    readers, than it's writers.

  9. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    amicus_curious wrote:

    >
    > "Peter Köhlmann" wrote in message
    > news:flm28o$hh$00$3@news.t-online.com...
    >> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "Rick" wrote in message
    >>> news:13nsriingnqjk3e@news.supernews.com...
    >>>>

    >>
    >> < snip billwg idiocy >
    >>
    >>>>> Further, since
    >>>>> Linux OS kernel is open-source, a hacker can disquise the virus to
    >>>>> become an integral part of the OS--and no virus checker (not that
    >>>>> Linux has any virus checkers, that's how primitive it is) can spot it.
    >>>>
    >>>> How would they propagate that virus laden kernel?
    >>>>
    >>> New versions are coming out lickety-split and patches are frequent.
    >>> Hide it in there and after a short while everyone will have it.

    >>
    >> So knowledge how linux kernels are distributed / maintained is another
    >> thing
    >> you know absolutely nothing about
    >>
    >> What a surprise...
    >> --

    > .Oh I bet I could go to the next Linux fair or whatever and hand out
    > thousands of DVDs


    Certainly. After all, they are soooo enticing. After all, nobody would have
    been able to dowload the very same thing (except your "exploit") weeks or
    even months before. And the very DVDs would have been in linux magazines a
    *long* time before you could even hope to be on the scene

    > that looked just like some popular distro and they would
    > go into service immediately. Ever been to a trade show?


    Yes. It /might/ work for windows. Users there are gullible enough there

    > And it wouldn't even have to be the kernel,


    The backtracing starts. You were asked to provide the vectors how to insert
    malware-kernels into the chain, and you suddenly find that it is nigh
    impossible (at least *very* difficult)

    > of course, just any utility likely to be used eventually.


    Certainly. After all, they tend to run as root

    > You twits only think you are safe.


    Well, a *lot* safer than you will ever be with windows
    --
    Windows was created to keep stupid people away from UNIX."
    -- Tom Christiansen


  10. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    ray wrote:

    > MS already DOES everything they can to block all that is non-MS. What
    > would you like them to add?


    Moron.



    > It also means that when a security issue is spotted it is almost
    > always fixed immediately - rather than waiting for six months to
    > issue a security patch as MS does.


    Lying moron.



    > I'm much more afraid of the MS virtual monopoly.


    Chicken**** lying moron.




  11. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:50:26 -0500, DFS wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    >
    >> MS already DOES everything they can to block all that is non-MS. What
    >> would you like them to add?

    >
    > Moron.
    >
    >
    >
    >> It also means that when a security issue is spotted it is almost
    >> always fixed immediately - rather than waiting for six months to
    >> issue a security patch as MS does.

    >
    > Lying moron.
    >
    >
    >
    >> I'm much more afraid of the MS virtual monopoly.

    >
    > Chicken**** lying moron.


    Thank you for the very insightful and elucidating analysis.


  12. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.


    "Jim Richardson" wrote in message
    news:j90355-vec.ln1@dragon.myth...
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 18:37:50 -0500,
    > amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> "Peter Köhlmann" wrote in message
    >> news:flm28o$hh$00$3@news.t-online.com...
    >>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Rick" wrote in message
    >>>> news:13nsriingnqjk3e@news.supernews.com...
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>> < snip billwg idiocy >
    >>>
    >>>>>> Further, since
    >>>>>> Linux OS kernel is open-source, a hacker can disquise the virus to
    >>>>>> become an integral part of the OS--and no virus checker (not that
    >>>>>> Linux
    >>>>>> has any virus checkers, that's how primitive it is) can spot it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> How would they propagate that virus laden kernel?
    >>>>>
    >>>> New versions are coming out lickety-split and patches are frequent.
    >>>> Hide
    >>>> it in there and after a short while everyone will have it.
    >>>
    >>> So knowledge how linux kernels are distributed / maintained is another
    >>> thing
    >>> you know absolutely nothing about
    >>>
    >>> What a surprise...
    >>> --

    >> .Oh I bet I could go to the next Linux fair or whatever and hand out
    >> thousands of DVDs that looked just like some popular distro and they
    >> would
    >> go into service immediately. Ever been to a trade show?
    >>
    >> And it wouldn't even have to be the kernel, of course, just any utility
    >> likely to be used eventually. You twits only think you are safe.
    >>

    >
    >
    > and this has what to do with open source? since that was the discussion
    > in hand.
    >

    Well, look up above a few lines, my dear Watson, where it says "How would
    they propagate that virus laden kernel?" Try to stay with the conversation.

    > your attack listed above works for both open and closed source, and is
    > not a differentiator between them. Please try again.
    >

    It just goes to show that anything that is popular is vulnerable. If Linux
    ever becomes popular, it will be just as vulnerable as Windows. It is safe
    so far, but there is no absolute guarantee that won't happen someday.


  13. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 18:26:59 -0500, amicus_curious wrote:

    >"AZ Nomad" wrote in message
    >news:slrnfnt6sq.rqq.aznomad.2@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net...
    >> On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 14:33:30 -0500, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >>>"gordon" wrote in message
    >>>news:477e6b29$0$26019$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
    >>>> ray wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> It also means that when a security issue is spotted it is almost always
    >>>>> fixed immediately - rather than waiting for six months to issue a
    >>>>> security
    >>>>> patch as MS does.
    >>>>
    >>>> Most of the time. There are certain vulnerabilities that MS has NEVER
    >>>> patched!
    >>>>
    >>>Nothing of any consequence, though. The real problem is that users do not
    >>>apply available fixes and that isn't limited to Windows users. The Linux
    >>>patch system is pretty clumsy and ineffective in reaching affected users.

    >>
    >> The real problem is that the default windows users run with all protection
    >> disabled.


    >Quite the opposite now. That's why some people have voiced some
    >frustratioin with Vista since some things won't work without being enabled.


    Bull****. The layers of naging change nothing. The default user on
    a vista system is still an administrator and any process can wipe out
    the system on a whim.

  14. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add ?Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    amicus_curious did eloquently scribble:

    > wrote in message
    > news:9nh255-5dg.ln1@tux.glaci.com...
    >> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Nothing of any consequence, though. The real problem is that users do
    >>> not
    >>> apply available fixes and that isn't limited to Windows users. The Linux
    >>> patch system is pretty clumsy and ineffective in reaching affected users.

    >>
    >> Eh? Apt and RPM based distros automatically get updates from their
    >> repository systems and have for years. Unlike Windows Update, the
    >> Linux system handles ALL the software, including third party software
    >> accepted into the repository and vendor repositories added to the
    >> source list. This is all handled automatically, seamlessly, with
    >> all dependencies sorted out and never a reboot needed accept when
    >> a kernel version changes.
    >>

    > So what is Novell? It doesn't do that at all.


    Yes... It does.
    SuSE linux has YaST auto-update which (along with kde and gnome toolbar
    applets) alert you whenever there is an update available.

    Click the button, update starts, leave it, update completes, bingo, done.
    And as usual, you're utterly utterly wrong...

    Are you ever right about ANYTHING linux related?

    >> Furthermore, you can even do complete version upgrades this way. I
    >> recently upgraded an Ubuntu 7.04 system to 7.10 remotely, over the
    >> Internet, from more than 1000 miles away actually. It was as simple
    >> as pointing the system at the new apt repository and issuing the
    >> upgrade command (or just a mouse click if I had been at the console).
    >>
    >> What exactly is 'clumsy' or 'ineffective' about that?
    >>

    > Start with the fact that I have never heard tell of it.


    You're been here YEARS and you've never heard of apt-get dist-upgrade?
    You are either being incredibly dishonest...
    Or incredibly stupid.
    No change there then.

    > You all will sneer,


    You betcha

    > but I am, in spite of your sneers, reasonably astute in regards to this sort
    > of thing and much more likely to know about it than most people.


    Yeah.... Riiiiiight.
    How come are you wrong so often? Novell can't do auto updates? Never heard
    of debian's apt packaging system's capabilities? The one thing debian people
    have had (and have been bragging about) for a DECADE?

    Yeah, that's very astute, that is.

    > So if I
    > don't know, it is a failure of the community to reach out and educate me and
    > by inference a failure to educate anyone.


    LOL
    Why would anyone try to EDUCATE you?
    What do you expect, a jehovas witness style knock on the door?
    "Hello, have you heard of the truth of linux? I have a cd with debian I can
    give you if you're interested."

    It's up to you to educate YOURSELF you idiot.

    And you claim to be astute.
    adjective
    marked by practical hardheaded intelligence; "a smart businessman"; "an
    astute tenant always reads the small print in a lease"

    I think you need to learn what words mean before throwing them around
    willynilly.
    --
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
    | | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
    | in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
    | Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  15. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    amicus_curious wrote:

    > If I were the mythical Microsoft evil genius bent on embarassing, say,
    > Ubuntu, I could arrange to produce and casually distribute a lot of DVDs
    > that looked like the real thing but were not. *Consider all the people
    > here who talk of handing out these LiveCDs to influence Window users to
    > switch. Do you know where that DVD has been?


    That's why such things as MD5 were invented.

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  16. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add ?Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    amicus_curious wrote:

    > Well by now I am sure the answer is clear to you, but in case you haven't
    > read the other posts, the exploit doesn't have to be in the kernel and the
    > kernel or other file may not have come from Linus himself. *It's just a
    > boot CD/DVD, eh, that says its Ubuntu or something and it runs Linux just
    > fine only it has a Trojan buried in there somewhere ready to wake up and
    > smell the coffee.


    You don't rely on whether or not it "says" it's Ubuntu. You run an MD5 check
    to make sure. Sheesh! Are you trying to tell us that the only way to get
    people to run an exploit is to hand them a trojan and get them to run it?

    har har har har har har...

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  17. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 21:36:59 -0500,
    amicus_curious wrote:
    >
    > "Jim Richardson" wrote in message
    > news:j90355-vec.ln1@dragon.myth...
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 18:37:50 -0500,
    >> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>
    >>> "Peter Köhlmann" wrote in message
    >>> news:flm28o$hh$00$3@news.t-online.com...
    >>>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Rick" wrote in message
    >>>>> news:13nsriingnqjk3e@news.supernews.com...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> < snip billwg idiocy >
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> Further, since
    >>>>>>> Linux OS kernel is open-source, a hacker can disquise the virus to
    >>>>>>> become an integral part of the OS--and no virus checker (not that
    >>>>>>> Linux
    >>>>>>> has any virus checkers, that's how primitive it is) can spot it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> How would they propagate that virus laden kernel?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> New versions are coming out lickety-split and patches are frequent.
    >>>>> Hide
    >>>>> it in there and after a short while everyone will have it.
    >>>>
    >>>> So knowledge how linux kernels are distributed / maintained is another
    >>>> thing
    >>>> you know absolutely nothing about
    >>>>
    >>>> What a surprise...
    >>>> --
    >>> .Oh I bet I could go to the next Linux fair or whatever and hand out
    >>> thousands of DVDs that looked just like some popular distro and they
    >>> would
    >>> go into service immediately. Ever been to a trade show?
    >>>
    >>> And it wouldn't even have to be the kernel, of course, just any utility
    >>> likely to be used eventually. You twits only think you are safe.
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> and this has what to do with open source? since that was the discussion
    >> in hand.
    >>

    > Well, look up above a few lines, my dear Watson, where it says "How would
    > they propagate that virus laden kernel?" Try to stay with the conversation.
    >
    >> your attack listed above works for both open and closed source, and is
    >> not a differentiator between them. Please try again.
    >>

    > It just goes to show that anything that is popular is vulnerable. If Linux
    > ever becomes popular, it will be just as vulnerable as Windows. It is safe
    > so far, but there is no absolute guarantee that won't happen someday.
    >


    false logic. A cardboard box is not as secure as a safe, and it isn't
    because the cardboard box is more common.

    MS made certain design decisions that still affect security in a
    negative way today. including conflating open and execute. This has been
    discussed here and elsewhere endlessly, yet there's always someone who
    wants to make the false claims you do.




    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHf3Kvd90bcYOAWPYRAsTWAKDo0hvM53zT8Rk5rbsCHR XT6PVD+gCgtJJ6
    Z7volbes7+r8h4cYAMeSC9A=
    =uuCZ
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    "It doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always gets in"

  18. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    Jim Richardson espoused:
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 21:36:59 -0500,
    > amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> "Jim Richardson" wrote in message
    >> news:j90355-vec.ln1@dragon.myth...
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 18:37:50 -0500,
    >>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> "Peter Köhlmann" wrote in message
    >>>> news:flm28o$hh$00$3@news.t-online.com...
    >>>>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Rick" wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:13nsriingnqjk3e@news.supernews.com...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> < snip billwg idiocy >
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Further, since
    >>>>>>>> Linux OS kernel is open-source, a hacker can disquise the virus to
    >>>>>>>> become an integral part of the OS--and no virus checker (not that
    >>>>>>>> Linux
    >>>>>>>> has any virus checkers, that's how primitive it is) can spot it.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> How would they propagate that virus laden kernel?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> New versions are coming out lickety-split and patches are frequent.
    >>>>>> Hide
    >>>>>> it in there and after a short while everyone will have it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So knowledge how linux kernels are distributed / maintained is another
    >>>>> thing
    >>>>> you know absolutely nothing about
    >>>>>
    >>>>> What a surprise...
    >>>>> --
    >>>> .Oh I bet I could go to the next Linux fair or whatever and hand out
    >>>> thousands of DVDs that looked just like some popular distro and they
    >>>> would
    >>>> go into service immediately. Ever been to a trade show?
    >>>>
    >>>> And it wouldn't even have to be the kernel, of course, just any utility
    >>>> likely to be used eventually. You twits only think you are safe.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> and this has what to do with open source? since that was the discussion
    >>> in hand.
    >>>

    >> Well, look up above a few lines, my dear Watson, where it says "How would
    >> they propagate that virus laden kernel?" Try to stay with the conversation.
    >>
    >>> your attack listed above works for both open and closed source, and is
    >>> not a differentiator between them. Please try again.
    >>>

    >> It just goes to show that anything that is popular is vulnerable. If Linux
    >> ever becomes popular, it will be just as vulnerable as Windows. It is safe
    >> so far, but there is no absolute guarantee that won't happen someday.
    >>

    >
    > false logic. A cardboard box is not as secure as a safe, and it isn't
    > because the cardboard box is more common.
    >
    > MS made certain design decisions that still affect security in a
    > negative way today. including conflating open and execute. This has been
    > discussed here and elsewhere endlessly, yet there's always someone who
    > wants to make the false claims you do.
    >


    Considering that open-source software has been the dominant net server
    software for several years, clearly the argument is bunkum.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  19. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why not add ?Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

    > amicus_curious did eloquently scribble:
    >
    >> wrote in message
    >> news:9nh255-5dg.ln1@tux.glaci.com...
    >>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> Nothing of any consequence, though. The real problem is that users do
    >>>> not
    >>>> apply available fixes and that isn't limited to Windows users. The
    >>>> Linux patch system is pretty clumsy and ineffective in reaching
    >>>> affected users.
    >>>
    >>> Eh? Apt and RPM based distros automatically get updates from their
    >>> repository systems and have for years. Unlike Windows Update, the
    >>> Linux system handles ALL the software, including third party software
    >>> accepted into the repository and vendor repositories added to the
    >>> source list. This is all handled automatically, seamlessly, with
    >>> all dependencies sorted out and never a reboot needed accept when
    >>> a kernel version changes.
    >>>

    >> So what is Novell? It doesn't do that at all.

    >
    > Yes... It does.
    > SuSE linux has YaST auto-update which (along with kde and gnome toolbar
    > applets) alert you whenever there is an update available.
    >
    > Click the button, update starts, leave it, update completes, bingo, done.
    > And as usual, you're utterly utterly wrong...
    >
    > Are you ever right about ANYTHING linux related?


    Well he know distro names, but that's where it stops.

    >>> Furthermore, you can even do complete version upgrades this way. I
    >>> recently upgraded an Ubuntu 7.04 system to 7.10 remotely, over the
    >>> Internet, from more than 1000 miles away actually. It was as simple
    >>> as pointing the system at the new apt repository and issuing the
    >>> upgrade command (or just a mouse click if I had been at the console).
    >>>
    >>> What exactly is 'clumsy' or 'ineffective' about that?
    >>>

    >> Start with the fact that I have never heard tell of it.

    >
    > You're been here YEARS and you've never heard of apt-get dist-upgrade?
    > You are either being incredibly dishonest...
    > Or incredibly stupid.
    > No change there then.
    >
    >> You all will sneer,

    >
    > You betcha


    Damn right!

    >> but I am, in spite of your sneers, reasonably astute in regards to this
    >> sort of thing and much more likely to know about it than most people.

    >
    > Yeah.... Riiiiiight.
    > How come are you wrong so often? Novell can't do auto updates? Never heard
    > of debian's apt packaging system's capabilities? The one thing debian
    > people have had (and have been bragging about) for a DECADE?


    Amazing isn't it...

    > Yeah, that's very astute, that is.
    >
    >> So if I
    >> don't know, it is a failure of the community to reach out and educate me
    >> and by inference a failure to educate anyone.

    >
    > LOL
    > Why would anyone try to EDUCATE you?
    > What do you expect, a jehovas witness style knock on the door?
    > "Hello, have you heard of the truth of linux? I have a cd with debian I
    > can give you if you're interested."
    >
    > It's up to you to educate YOURSELF you idiot.
    >
    > And you claim to be astute.
    > adjective
    > marked by practical hardheaded intelligence; "a smart businessman"; "an
    > astute tenant always reads the small print in a lease"
    >
    > I think you need to learn what words mean before throwing them around
    > willynilly.


    He's no more astute than a brick. An "astute" person would not have made
    such a stupid post, & probably not posted without doing some research
    first. Ergo the word amicus_curious/billwg/Bill Weisgerber *should* have
    used is "asinine".

    --
    : It takes time, this. One slight error in any of my thirteen billion
    calculations and we'll be blasted to smithereens. Here we go, then: 10, 9,
    8, 6, 5--
    Holly, *where's* 7?
    --Red Dwarf--

  20. Re: Microsoft Office blocks certain files as virus sources--why notadd Linux next? Linux is virusware.

    rat wrote:

    > "chrisv" wrote:
    >>
    >> rat wrote:
    >>
    >>> (snip ignorant bull****)

    >>
    >> You're an ignorant, lying fsckwit, rat.
    >>

    > And you are a zero or even negative


    Why? Because I'm "mean" to liars and assholes? I don't think there's
    anything wrong with that.

    > asset for your keeper.


    Ironic, considering that I'm shilling for no one, while you've admitted
    that you "would be one of the first to sign up as a Bill Gates fan if
    there were a club being formed."


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast