Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities - Mandrake

This is a discussion on Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities - Mandrake ; Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities that replicates on Linux systems and infects ELF executables. The files infected by the virus have their file size increased by 8759 bytes. 3979 bytes belong to the actual virus code while ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

  1. Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities that
    replicates on Linux systems and infects ELF executables.

    The files infected by the virus have their file size increased by 8759
    bytes. 3979 bytes belong to the actual virus code while the other 4662
    belong to the code of a backdoor attached by the virus at the end of
    the file.

    Although the backdoor code is copied along with the virus, it seems it
    appears designed in such way that it can be easily replaced with
    updated versions - the backdoor is not linked into the ELF structure,
    but is instead loaded and executed by the virus itself. Therefore
    improved versions of this virus, especially of the backdoor code can be
    expected in the future.

    The virus infects all the files in the current directory, but avoids
    infecting files with file names ending with "ps".

    To clarify: Files with names such as "steps", or even the popular Unix
    utility tool "PS" will be spared infection - as the final two lettes of
    their file names are "P" and "S" in sequence - "ps".

    If run from a root account the virus will also attempt to infect the
    files from the "/bin" system directory. In all cases no more than 201
    files are infected in one run.

    The backdoor found in this version of the virus is listening on the UDP
    port 3049, or if the respective port is not available, it will try to
    increase the port number until one which can be used is found. Various
    internal commands are available to directly execute files on the target
    system or to launch a sniffer and forward the traffic to the other
    machine. The backdoor will also attempt to edit the firewall rules list
    and wipe out any entries that might prevent it from communicating on
    the hooked port, or, on the port used to communicate with the remote
    machine in the case of the sniffer.

    Besides the above, the virus also attempts to prevent tracing by
    various debugging utilities by spawning a copy of itself, and
    attempting to debug itself from the spawned copy. If any debugger is
    already running, these steps will fail, and the virus will immediately
    terminate execution.

    Another detail is if the system uptime is 5 minutes or less, the virus
    will also terminate execution, probably in order to prevent simple
    inspection on "test" machines.

    This text was written by Costin Raiu, Kaspersky Labs, Romania

    This is a Linux virus that also implements several backdoor facilities,
    allowing an attacker to take control of the system infected with it in
    case the virus has been executed on account with root priviledges. The
    virus infects all the Linux binary executables in the current directory
    and the /bin directory, and listens to the first network card 'eth0' as
    well on the first PPP connection interface, and 'ppp0' for special
    packets sent in the EGP communication protocol. Whenever such a special
    package arrives, the virus allows the attacker to take control of the
    system with a root shell.

    The virus will also attempt to create two new devices in the /dev
    directory, named "/dev/hdx1" and "/dev/hdx2", and tries to access a Web
    page on the ns1.xoasis.com web server.

    Technical details:

    The viral part works by attaching itself to normal ELF executables,
    patching their header, and moving the entrypoint to the viral code. At
    the same time, the virus relocates all the data found after the
    original host code to the end of its own code. It is interesting to
    note that the virus also performs an anti-debugging check by seeing
    whether the current process is 'ptrace'-ed. If so, it will immediately
    terminate execution. If not, the virus looks for all the files in the
    current directory, and attempts to infect them. After this, it will
    also attempt to infect all the files in the '/bin' directory, which
    under normal conditions will only work if the infected program has been
    run under an account with higher privileges. There is no attempt in the
    viral code to exploit any Linux vulnerabilities in order to obtain
    higher access when the virus is run on a normal user account.

    The backdoor part of the virus attempts to create two new devices named
    "/dev/hdx1" and "/dev/hdx2", and if the creation succeeds, it checks
    for the existence of the two standard network interfaces 'eth0' or
    'ppp0', and attempts to set them into "promiscuous" mode. It also
    attempts to create an "Exterior Gateway Protocols" (EGP) raw socket,
    and put it into listening mode.

    When a special EGP IP packet arrives, the virus will check whether the
    23rd byte in the data-packet is 0x11, then it will check for the
    presence of a specific password, as a 3-byte string at the offset 0x2a
    in the buffer. If these two conditions are met, the backdoor will check
    for a "command" byte, which is either 1 or 2 - if the "command" byte is
    "1", it will spawn a standard "/bin/sh" shell, which the attacker can
    control on the remote system.

    Two strings can be seen inside the virus, but they are not used
    anywhere in the code. These strings are "snortdos" and "tory"

    Linux.OSF.8759
    Linux.RST
    Worm.Linux.Adm
    Worm.Linux.Cheese
    Worm.Linux.Mighty
    Worm.Linux.Ramen
    Worm.Linux.Slapper
    http://www.viruslibrary.com/virusinfo/Linux.htm

    __________________________________________________ _________________________________



    1980s
    There's been a bomb in Oxford Street! And in the
    days before Al'Qaeda, there's only one prime suspect.
    U.S.A sponsoring terrorists as always.


    The U.S.A has sponsored every terrorist organisation in the world.
    One way or another throughout history the U.S.A as attempted
    to kill you.



    Who's the Governor! You wankers. Keyboard warriors. Put up or shut the
    **** up.

    http://media.putfile.com/On-The-Streets-Of-America-3
    It shows you just how backward yanks are pathetic ****ing yanks.
    ____________________________
    ID signature
    Freedom, if you don't use it you lose it.
    Philip Davidson,
    10 Ronald Avenue
    West Ham
    E15 3AH
    East London
    Mobile phone 07906821566
    http://philipdavidson.blogspot.com/


  2. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    home.home1@virgin.net wrote:

    > Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities that
    > replicates on Linux systems and infects ELF executables.


    *Plonk!*

  3. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities


    Christopher Hunter wrote:

    > home.home1@virgin.net wrote:
    >
    > > Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities that
    > > replicates on Linux systems and infects ELF executables.

    >
    > *Plonk!*

    Test Message alt.os.linux.mandrake moments ago
    Test Message alt.os.linux.mandrake 30 hours ago
    Test Message alt.os.linux.mandrake 30 hours ago
    Test Message alt.os.linux.mandrake 45 hours ago
    Test Message alt.os.linux.mandrake 45 hours ago
    Test Message alt.os.linux.mandrake 2 days ago
    Test Message alt.os.linux.mandrake 2 days ago
    Show all
    Post Activity
    Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
    2003 1
    2004 1 12 2
    2006 6 20 12 20 54 55

    NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.45.245.119
    X-Complaints-To: abuse@blueyonder.co.uk

    **** off. ZzZzZ **** off.

    __________________________________________________ ____________________
    1980s
    There's been a bomb in Oxford Street! And in the
    days before Al'Qaeda, there's only one prime suspect.
    U.S.A sponsoring terrorists as always.


    The U.S.A has sponsored every terrorist organisation in the world.
    One way or another throughout history the U.S.A as attempted
    to kill you.



    Who's the Governor! You wankers. Keyboard warriors. Put up or shut the
    **** up.

    http://media.putfile.com/On-The-Streets-Of-America-3
    It shows you just how backward yanks are pathetic ****ing yanks.
    ____________________________
    ID signature
    Freedom, if you don't use it you lose it.
    Philip Davidson,
    10 Ronald Avenue
    West Ham
    E15 3AH
    East London
    Mobile phone 07906821566
    http://philipdavidson.blogspot.com/


  4. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 03:19:11 -0800, home.home1 wrote:


    > The U.S.A has sponsored every terrorist organisation in the world.


    And the UK tried to rule almost every country in the world. So what. Now
    go stick your head up the queen moms dress and move this crap to a
    political newsgroup.

    > One way or another throughout history the U.S.A as attempted to kill
    > you.
    >

    And it's too bad they didn't succeed with you.

    --
    Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
    http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
    My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
    HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm


  5. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities


    Wes Newell wrote:

    > On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 03:19:11 -0800, home.home1 wrote:
    >
    >

    Posts in All 58 Groups -- 5743 messages
    alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd -- 1439 messages alt.video.ptv.tivo
    -- 808 messages alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64 -- 725 messages
    alt.os.linux.mandrake -- 622 messages alt.tv.tech.hdtv -- 589 messages
    alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit -- 545 messages
    alt.comp.hardware.amd.thunderbird -- 223 messages alt.os.linux.mandriva
    -- 198 messages alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt -- 119 messages
    alt.comp.mainboards.abit -- 92 messages alt.comp.periphs.mainboard --
    82 messages alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt -- 63 messages dfw.forsale --
    40 messages alt.comp.hardware.overclocking -- 23 messages
    comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips -- 21 messages alt.comp.hardware -- 19
    messages alt.comp.periphs.mai...d.elitegroup -- 12 messages
    comp.os.linux.advocacy -- 12 messages rec.arts.tv -- 10 messages
    uk.comp.homebuilt -- 10 messages comp.os.os2.misc -- 9 messages
    alt.os.linux -- 7 messages alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus -- 6
    messages comp.sys.laptops -- 6 messages alt.certification.a-plus -- 5
    messages 24hoursupport.helpdesk -- 5 messages fa.linux.kernel -- 5
    messages alt.config -- 3 messages alt.ham-radio.atv -- 3 messages
    alt.comp.periphs.mai...si-microstar -- 3 messages
    comp.os.linux.hardware -- 3 messages dfw.general -- 3 messages
    comp.sys.intel -- 2 messages alt.video.ptv.replaytv -- 2 messages
    jaring.pcbase -- 2 messages alt.games.sony-playstation -- 2 messages
    alt.comp.bios -- 2 messages comp.home.automation -- 2 messages
    rec.video.cable-tv -- 2 messages microsoft.public.win..._and_support --
    1 message alt.os.linux.slackware -- 1 message alt.golf.forsale -- 1
    message comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.misc -- 1 message alt.satellite.tv --
    1 message misc.test -- 1 message comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video -- 1
    message de.comp.hardware.cpu+mainboard.amd -- 1 message alt.usenet -- 1
    message comp.os.os2.advocacy -- 1 message rec.video.desktop -- 1
    message alt.comp.periphs.gigabyte -- 1 message comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc --
    1 message alt.os.windows-xp -- 1 message alt.sys.pc-clone.acer -- 1
    message comp.arch -- 1 message comp.sys.hp.hardware -- 1 message
    comp.lang.fortran -- 1 message rec.radio.amateur.equipment -- 1 message

    Does An Economical HDTV Exist? alt.tv.tech.hdtv 113 minutes ago
    Does An Economical HDTV Exist? alt.tv.tech.hdtv 2 hours ago
    printing to a text file alt.os.linux.mandriva 2 hours ago
    TiVo vs. T-W 8300 DVR alt.video.ptv.tivo 10 hours ago
    Does An Economical HDTV Exist? alt.tv.tech.hdtv 10 hours ago
    Does An Economical HDTV Exist? alt.tv.tech.hdtv 11 hours ago
    Does An Economical HDTV Exist? alt.tv.tech.hdtv 11 hours ago
    TiVo vs. T-W 8300 DVR alt.video.ptv.tivo 24 hours ago
    TiVo vs. T-W 8300 DVR alt.video.ptv.tivo 35 hours ago
    Does A PORTABLE HDTV Exist? alt.tv.tech.hdtv 35 hours ago
    Show all
    Post Activity
    Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
    2004 9 165 191 151 144 252 259 210 152 116 181
    2005 195 172 213 177 82 127 146 185 146 114 118 313
    2006 206 365 199 101 137 163 151 218 184 125 76

    So you are mentally retarded do you not have some kind of supervision.
    http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.php


    __________________________________________________ ____________________

    1980s
    There's been a bomb in Oxford Street! And in the
    days before Al'Qaeda, there's only one prime suspect.
    U.S.A sponsoring terrorists as always.


    The U.S.A has sponsored every terrorist organisation in the world.
    One way or another throughout history the U.S.A as attempted
    to kill you.



    Who's the Governor! You wankers. Keyboard warriors. Put up or shut the
    **** up.

    http://media.putfile.com/On-The-Streets-Of-America-3
    It shows you just how backward yanks are pathetic ****ing yanks.
    ____________________________
    ID signature
    Freedom, if you don't use it you lose it.
    Philip Davidson,
    10 Ronald Avenue
    West Ham
    E15 3AH
    East London
    Mobile phone 07906821566
    http://philipdavidson.blogspot.com/


  6. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    Wes Newell wrote:

    > On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 03:19:11 -0800, home.home1 wrote:
    >
    >
    >> The U.S.A has sponsored every terrorist organisation in the world.

    >
    > And the UK tried to rule almost every country in the world. So what. Now
    > go stick your head up the queen moms dress and move this crap to a
    > political newsgroup.
    >
    >> One way or another throughout history the U.S.A as attempted to kill
    >> you.
    >>

    > And it's too bad they didn't succeed with you.
    >

    comon', Americans are good people. all they want is cold hard cash.



  7. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    On Sunday 19 November 2006 12:13, Christopher Hunter stood up and addressed
    the masses in /alt.os.linux.mandrake/ as follows...:

    > home.home1@virgin.net wrote:
    >
    >> Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities that
    >> replicates on Linux systems and infects ELF executables.

    >
    > *Plonk!*


    There are *no* self-replicating viruses on GNU/Linux. Said virus is a
    proof-of-concept virus developed for theoretical purposes, i.e. to prove
    that ELF binaries could in theory be infected and that they could thus
    replicate. However, this would first of all require an *infection.*

    The multi-user nature of UNIX operating systems would require an infected
    executable to be given execute permissions by the root user and started by
    the root user in order for it to load into memory and to have the necessary
    permissions to write to any filesystems containing ELF binaries.

    The theory that this virus could be given execute permission and loaded into
    memory by malware still does not preclude that this requires root
    privileges, and imposes the same restrictions on the malware that would
    start the virus as on the virus itself.

    And in addition, the usability of the virus - provided that the root user
    grants his cooperation in making it executable and starting it - has
    already long been annihilated by kernel patches before it became known that
    this particular virus existed.

    Lastly, the Linux kernel by default makes use of the /NX/ bit for marking
    data pages as non-executable on all architectures, with the sole exception
    of /IA32,/ and even on /IA32/ Linux can emulate the /NX/ bit via software
    if the kernel was compiled with PAE support, i.e. for /i686/ or better and
    with /HIGHMEM_64/ support. /x86-64/ has an /NX/ bit in hardware and Linux
    uses it by default unless told via a bootparameter that it shouldn't.

    P.S.: The reason why there are Windows users who feel the need to
    voluntarily troll GNU/Linux newsgroups is because those particular Windows
    users feel threatened in their selfesteem by GNU/Linux, as they fear that
    GNU/Linux will expose their cluelessness regarding information technology.

    So in essence, it is not GNU/Linux they hate, but themselves. Their hatred
    towards GNU/Linux and its users is only a cowardly projection of the feared
    confrontation with their own ignorance and the resulting self-image of
    being stupid.

    There are people who know everything, people who know a lot, people who know
    just enough to be dangerous but who will one day "get there", and people
    who actually know very little but are afraid that anyone would find out
    about that. Wintrolls fall under the latter category...

    The above all said, this particular Wintroll is parked in my /killfile/ for
    his stalking and abusive language. I wouldn't have /killfiled/ him over
    the trolling alone, because I consider refuting Wintrolls to be very
    important before the eyes of the lurking newbies, who are and have been
    exposed to MicroFUD far too much already. ;-)

    --
    With kind regards,

    *Aragorn*
    (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

  8. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    Aragorn wrote:

    > On Sunday 19 November 2006 12:13, Christopher Hunter stood up and
    > addressed the masses in /alt.os.linux.mandrake/ as follows...:
    >
    >> home.home1@virgin.net wrote:
    >>
    >>> Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities that
    >>> replicates on Linux systems and infects ELF executables.

    >>
    >> *Plonk!*

    >
    > There are *no* self-replicating viruses on GNU/Linux. Said virus is a
    > proof-of-concept virus developed for theoretical purposes, i.e. to prove
    > that ELF binaries could in theory be infected and that they could thus
    > replicate. However, this would first of all require an *infection.*
    >
    > The multi-user nature of UNIX operating systems would require an infected
    > executable to be given execute permissions by the root user and started by
    > the root user in order for it to load into memory and to have the
    > necessary permissions to write to any filesystems containing ELF binaries.
    >
    > The theory that this virus could be given execute permission and loaded
    > into memory by malware still does not preclude that this requires root
    > privileges, and imposes the same restrictions on the malware that would
    > start the virus as on the virus itself.
    >
    > And in addition, the usability of the virus - provided that the root user
    > grants his cooperation in making it executable and starting it - has
    > already long been annihilated by kernel patches before it became known
    > that this particular virus existed.
    >
    > Lastly, the Linux kernel by default makes use of the /NX/ bit for marking
    > data pages as non-executable on all architectures, with the sole exception
    > of /IA32,/ and even on /IA32/ Linux can emulate the /NX/ bit via software
    > if the kernel was compiled with PAE support, i.e. for /i686/ or better and
    > with /HIGHMEM_64/ support. /x86-64/ has an /NX/ bit in hardware and Linux
    > uses it by default unless told via a bootparameter that it shouldn't.
    >
    > P.S.: The reason why there are Windows users who feel the need to
    > voluntarily troll GNU/Linux newsgroups is because those particular Windows
    > users feel threatened in their selfesteem by GNU/Linux, as they fear that
    > GNU/Linux will expose their cluelessness regarding information technology.
    >
    > So in essence, it is not GNU/Linux they hate, but themselves. Their
    > hatred towards GNU/Linux and its users is only a cowardly projection of
    > the feared confrontation with their own ignorance and the resulting
    > self-image of being stupid.
    >
    > There are people who know everything, people who know a lot, people who
    > know just enough to be dangerous but who will one day "get there", and
    > people who actually know very little but are afraid that anyone would find
    > out
    > about that. Wintrolls fall under the latter category...
    >
    > The above all said, this particular Wintroll is parked in my /killfile/
    > for
    > his stalking and abusive language. I wouldn't have /killfiled/ him over
    > the trolling alone, because I consider refuting Wintrolls to be very
    > important before the eyes of the lurking newbies, who are and have been
    > exposed to MicroFUD far too much already. ;-)



    He quoted some silly 4-year-old article about a non-existent Linux virus.
    He then got abusive when he was told that he was spouting nonsense (not by
    me, incidentally). That's why he got rerouted to the bottom of the bit-bin
    with a loud *plonk!*

    It's funny when the Wintrolls have to resort to 4 and 5 year old non-stories
    in stupid efforts to claim that GNU/Linux is as flawed as Windoze!

    Regards

    Chris

  9. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    On Monday 20 November 2006 18:59, Christopher Hunter stood up and addressed
    the masses in /alt.os.linux.mandrake/ as follows...:

    > Aragorn wrote:
    >
    >> The above all said, this particular Wintroll is parked in my /killfile/
    >> for his stalking and abusive language. I wouldn't have /killfiled/ him
    >> over the trolling alone, because I consider refuting Wintrolls to be very
    >> important before the eyes of the lurking newbies, who are and have been
    >> exposed to MicroFUD far too much already. ;-)

    >
    > He quoted some silly 4-year-old article about a non-existent Linux virus.


    I wouldn't have seen that if it weren't for the follow-ups. ;-)

    > He then got abusive when he was told that he was spouting nonsense (not by
    > me, incidentally).


    Got to see that in the meantime as well via the follow-ups. ;-) Getting
    abusive is so typical for Wintrolls. Maybe it makes them feel more like
    grown-ups if they swear a lot, but the irony of it is that only they would
    have this impression while everyone with a brain would consider it utter
    nonsense - kind of like /you-know-who./

    > That's why he got rerouted to the bottom of the bit-bin with a loud
    > *plonk!*


    Yup, same reasons here. I don't mind refuting FUD - in fact, I like that,
    because it's the only way of dealing with it before the eyes of the
    intimidated newbies - but I do expect people to be civil when talking to
    me.

    I have no need or interest for conversations comprising of four-letter words
    which all seem to pertain to reproductive organs and various manifestations
    of bodily contact, or in the very least to several forms of digestive
    system excretions.

    > It's funny when the Wintrolls have to resort to 4 and 5 year old
    > non-stories in stupid efforts to claim that GNU/Linux is as flawed as
    > Windoze!


    Well, you have to give them some credit there, as it is quite common and
    natural in *their* world to be troubled by 4- to 5-year old viruses.

    For instance, it is a well-known fact that Internet Explorer has been
    carrying a dangerous and quite exploitable vulnerability from 1997 until
    now - "now" being IE 7 - and that Microsoft *has* *known* about it all this
    time but chose not to patch it because "to their knowledge, this security
    leak had not yet been discovered or exploited by the public and so it
    wasn't a real security hazard".

    Just goes to show what Microsoft considers security - i.e. security by
    obscurity - and perhaps even more importantly, the risks *they* are willing
    to take *with* *your* *computer* *and* *data!*

    You know, I really don't get it. With all of this well-documented
    information regarding Microsoft's malpractices, with their numerous
    convictions as abusive monopolists and their equally numerous refusals to
    comply with court regulations, people are *still* allowing them to make
    choices for the consumer, people are *still* trusting their valuable data
    to them and people are *still* willfully buying their unduly expensive
    software licenses - it is only the license that you can buy, not the
    software[1] itself - and people are *still* buying all the FUD and the
    "independent studies" - funded by Microsoft itself, of course - with regard
    to security, deployability, system architecture and total cost of
    ownership.

    People *really* *must* *be* very stupid... :-/

    __
    [1] For the sake of information towards the absolute newbies, of course.

    --
    With kind regards,

    *Aragorn*
    (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

  10. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 20:55:29 GMT, Aragorn wrote:

    > I wouldn't have seen that if it weren't for the follow-ups. ;-)


    Ditto.

    > For instance, it is a well-known fact that Internet Explorer has been
    > carrying a dangerous and quite exploitable vulnerability from 1997 until
    > now - "now" being IE 7 - and that Microsoft *has* *known* about it all this
    > time but chose not to patch it because "to their knowledge, this security
    > leak had not yet been discovered or exploited by the public and so it
    > wasn't a real security hazard".


    .... run that past me again? Microsoft know about an exploitable
    vulnerability... yet haven't patched it because it's not been discovered??

    "Why's that hole in the pavement not covered over?" - 'It's because nobody
    knows about it' - "But it still needs covering over, someone could be
    injured" - 'But nobody's discovered it yet'

    > You know, I really don't get it. With all of this well-documented
    > information regarding Microsoft's malpractices,


    CURSE U LINUX FERAKS WIHT UR FUD!!11

    > with their numerous convictions as abusive monopolists and their equally
    > numerous refusals to comply with court regulations,


    CONSPIRA...CONSPI.... TEH WORDLS AGAINTS UZ!!!11 IT HAPENS COS MICROSOTF
    SI WEL NOWN ADN WEL USED!!11

    > [...]
    > people are *still* buying all the FUD and the "independent studies" -
    > funded by Microsoft itself, of course - with regard to security,
    > deployability, system architecture and total cost of ownership.


    I was curious about my early escapades with an OS called Xenix. So,
    digging around in the internet, waddaya know... SCO Xenix was Microsofts
    version of Unix.

    Why does SCO sound familiar?

    > People *really* *must* *be* very stupid... :-/


    I'm sure that's how the Redmond tribe like people.

    --
    Linux: because I work with Windows, and that's bad enough.
    AOLM FAQ - http://blinkynet.net/comp/faq_aolm.html
    RLU #300033 - MDV 2006 - WindowMaker 0.92.0

  11. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    On 2006-11-20, Aragorn wrote:
    > On Monday 20 November 2006 22:20, Dave stood up and addressed the masses
    > in /alt.os.linux.mandrake/ as follows...:

    ....
    >> I was curious about my early escapades with an OS called Xenix. So,
    >> digging around in the internet, waddaya know... SCO Xenix was Microsofts
    >> version of Unix.

    >
    > More correctly, Microsoft XENIX was a licensed version of SCO XENIX, which
    > in turn was an SCO UNIX version for the Intel /i80286/ - yes, that is
    > right, it was a 16-bit operating system.




    Xenix is Unix -- or at least one flavor of it. In the late
    70's, Microsoft licensed the Unix sources from AT&T and ported
    them to a number of platforms. In those days, AT&T would
    license the Unix software but not the Unix name, thus each
    company had to invent their own name. Microsoft picked Xenix.
    Microsoft did not sell Xenix to end users. Instead, they
    licensed the software to OEMs (Intel, Tandy, Altos, SCO, etc.)
    who provided a finished end-user package.


    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, author |
    Shell Scripting Recipes: | My code in this post, if any,
    A Problem-Solution Approach | is released under the
    2005, Apress | GNU General Public Licence

  12. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:26:07 GMT, Aragorn
    wrote:


    >
    >> Why does SCO sound familiar?

    >
    >SCO used to be Santa Cruz Operations, a UNIX vendor. Microsoft licensed
    >XENIX from them so as to have a UNIX operating system in their offer.
    >



    I think your news reader failed to display the picture of
    Daves cheek with a lump where his tongue resided inside.

    Harvie

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  13. Re: Linux.OSF.8759 is a virus with enhanced backdoor capabilities

    On Tuesday 21 November 2006 02:00, Harvie Powis stood up and addressed the
    masses in /alt.os.linux.mandrake/ as follows...:

    > On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:26:07 GMT, Aragorn
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>
    >>> Why does SCO sound familiar?

    >>
    >> SCO used to be Santa Cruz Operations, a UNIX vendor. Microsoft licensed
    >> XENIX from them so as to have a UNIX operating system in their offer.
    >>

    >
    >
    > I think your news reader failed to display the picture of
    > Daves cheek with a lump where his tongue resided inside.


    Must be because I've set it up to connect to a non-binary newsfeed
    only... ;-)

    No seriously, SCO is of course familiar as a name, but not everyone knows
    that The SCO Group as it exists today is not the same thing as the Santa
    Cruz Operations company. In fact, that which is called The SCO Group today
    was the company that used to go by the name Caldera, and who _bought_ the
    original SCO company.

    It is this that I wanted to stipulate. ;-)

    --
    With kind regards,

    *Aragorn*
    (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

+ Reply to Thread