Ubuntu & Antivirus - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Ubuntu & Antivirus - Ubuntu ; Ignoramus17842 wrote: > Did you understand that phishing websites were running on compromised > Linux servers? So what does the website operating system have to do with what kind of site one places there? The phisher buys a cheap hosting ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 125

Thread: Ubuntu & Antivirus

  1. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    Ignoramus17842 wrote:

    > Did you understand that phishing websites were running on compromised
    > Linux servers?


    So what does the website operating system have to do with what kind of
    site one places there?

    The phisher buys a cheap hosting site, puts up his page that looks a lot
    like PayPal, or CitiBank, or whomever, and sends email messages to a
    million people enticing them to visit and leave account numbers.

    Still nothing to do with Linux.

    --
    -bts
    -Friends don't let friends drive Vista

  2. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    John F. Morse wrote:

    > Please spend some time learning something and stop wasting everybody
    > else's time.


    Ahh, didn't see your post yet, John. Yes, I'll agree with your
    statement.

    --
    -bts
    -Friends don't let friends drive Vista

  3. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    On 2008-03-28, John F. Morse wrote:
    > Ignoramus17842 wrote:
    >
    >> Did you understand that phishing websites were running on compromised
    >> Linux servers?

    >
    >
    > Phishing sites are set up to phish. It matters not on what OS the
    > Webserver runs.


    > The Linux servers aren't "compromised" at all. They are designed to
    > phish. The phishers just happened to choose a good OS for their shady
    > operation.
    >
    > Your grasp of "phishing" is just as irrelevant as your grasp of "virus."
    >
    > Please spend some time learning something and stop wasting everybody
    > else's time.


    Actually I understand it much better than you. You are assuming that
    phishers own the servers where they host their phishing websites.

    That assumption is wrong. They use hacked computers such as Linux
    webservers, to host their sites. They do it for three reasons, one is
    to not pay for them, another is to not suffer when they get shut down
    (since they can hack more Linux servers), and yet one more is to cover
    their tracks and to not be caught.

    If you did not know that, you are in need of major re-education.

    http://www.honeynet.org/papers/phishing/

    My credentials are of not any particular interest, but I released my
    first GPL program in 1996. The program involved email, PGP digital
    signatures, and CGI scripts, and has no known vulnerabilities to date.

    i

  4. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    mark wrote in news:qXXGj.4568$N_5.1668@trnddc05:

    >>> What a putz.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Hey mark, go fukk yourself...LOL!
    >> You're not that bright you stupid asshole loser!
    >> Frank

    > A very well thought and intelligent reply. What a complete idiot you
    > are.


    Frank hasn't developed any new material in months.


  5. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    On 2008-03-28, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
    > Ignoramus17842 wrote:
    >
    >> Did you understand that phishing websites were running on compromised
    >> Linux servers?

    >
    > So what does the website operating system have to do with what kind of
    > site one places there?


    Completely nothing.

    > The phisher buys a cheap hosting site, puts up his page that looks a lot
    > like PayPal, or CitiBank, or whomever, and sends email messages to a
    > million people enticing them to visit and leave account numbers.
    >
    > Still nothing to do with Linux.


    I think that you came up with a great business idea, buy a website in
    your name with your credit card, and commit major felonies with it.

    Not.

    Usually phisers hack webservers and place their content there, which
    ensures their anonymity, since their real life data does not tie them
    to those websites.

    i

  6. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    DanS wrote:
    > mark wrote in news:qXXGj.4568$N_5.1668@trnddc05:
    >
    >>>> What a putz.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Hey mark, go fukk yourself...LOL!
    >>> You're not that bright you stupid asshole loser!
    >>> Frank

    >> A very well thought and intelligent reply. What a complete idiot you
    >> are.

    >
    > Frank hasn't developed any new material in months.
    >

    I just "met" him a few days ago. He really is a one trick pony. I'd send him a book of witty retorts but I doubt he can read. Thanks for the heads up.

  7. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    DanS wrote:

    > mark wrote in news:qXXGj.4568$N_5.1668@trnddc05:
    >
    >
    >>>>What a putz.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>Hey mark, go fukk yourself...LOL!
    >>>You're not that bright you stupid asshole loser!
    >>>Frank

    >>
    >>A very well thought and intelligent reply. What a complete idiot you
    >>are.

    >
    >
    > Frank hasn't developed any new material in months.
    >


    Who cares when you're surrounded by the same idiot losers all the time!
    Frank

  8. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    mark wrote:

    > DanS wrote:
    >
    >> mark wrote in news:qXXGj.4568$N_5.1668@trnddc05:
    >>
    >>>>> What a putz.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> Hey mark, go fukk yourself...LOL!
    >>>> You're not that bright you stupid asshole loser!
    >>>> Frank
    >>>
    >>> A very well thought and intelligent reply. What a complete idiot you
    >>> are.

    >>
    >>
    >> Frank hasn't developed any new material in months.

    >
    > I just "met" him a few days ago. He really is a one trick pony. I'd
    > send him a book of witty retorts but I doubt he can read. Thanks for
    > the heads up.


    First thing you should try and do is to pull you head out of your ass...LOL!
    Can you?
    Frank

  9. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    Ignoramus17842 illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

    >
    > Did you understand that phishing websites were running on compromised
    > Linux servers?


    A website runninmg on a linux server? Who'd have thunk it?

    And as for "compromised", you probably mean "out of date AMP"

    Linux can not be held responsible for amateur users who do not patch
    correctly. Just in the same way that the misuse of "Format C" and
    "rm -rf" cannot be attributed to the OS in question.

    OK. So if someone rams a screwdriver into their eyeball, you would
    blame the screwdriver. Right?

    --
    Moog

    "If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
    mashed potatoes"

  10. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > "dennis@home" writes:


    >
    >> If you need/want secure wireless using WEP you can setup a tunnel and
    >> use IPSEC or similar to encrypt it. Anyone can connect to the wireless
    >> but they aren't going anywhere. There are some nice wireless routers
    >> with endpoint termination if you want to do it.
    >>

    >
    > Yeah, ditto if he's using ssh over the link - perfectly safe then.


    Interesting. Like I said, I use WPA, but know someone with a WEP only
    device. So there is a solution then.

    I'll let them know.

    Thanks BTW, Dennis.


    --
    Moog

    "If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
    mashed potatoes"

  11. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    Ignoramus17842 wrote:
    > On 2008-03-28, John F. Morse wrote:
    >
    >> Ignoramus17842 wrote:
    >>
    >>> Did you understand that phishing websites were running on compromised
    >>> Linux servers?
    >>>

    >> Phishing sites are set up to phish. It matters not on what OS the
    >> Webserver runs.
    >>
    >> The Linux servers aren't "compromised" at all. They are designed to
    >> phish. The phishers just happened to choose a good OS for their shady
    >> operation.
    >>
    >> Your grasp of "phishing" is just as irrelevant as your grasp of "virus."
    >>
    >> Please spend some time learning something and stop wasting everybody
    >> else's time.
    >>

    >
    > Actually I understand it much better than you. You are assuming that
    > phishers own the servers where they host their phishing websites.



    No, you are assuming I was assuming. You are dead wrong.

    These servers don't need to be owned by the phishers. They can be rented
    from any hosting company.


    > That assumption is wrong. They use hacked computers such as Linux
    > webservers, to host their sites. They do it for three reasons, one is
    > to not pay for them, another is to not suffer when they get shut down
    > (since they can hack more Linux servers), and yet one more is to cover
    > their tracks and to not be caught.



    But they don't "hack," they "crack."

    I seriously doubt they are cracking into Linux servers.

    And a lot of these phishing Web servers are off-shore where anything
    goes. They could be located on ships at sea, using satellite ISP
    connections.

    Again, you assume to narrowly for belief.


    > If you did not know that, you are in need of major re-education.
    >
    > http://www.honeynet.org/papers/phishing/
    >
    > My credentials are of not any particular interest, but I released my
    > first GPL program in 1996. The program involved email, PGP digital
    > signatures, and CGI scripts, and has no known vulnerabilities to date.
    >



    Great! I've never released any GPL program nor CGI script, and I could
    care less about your credentials. Totally unimpressed, but I can tell
    from your breathing that you don't know squat about what you are trying
    to get others to swallow.

    Honeynet.org huh? Three year old info on attacks five to seven years
    ago, caused by an old (Windows) NetBIOS-SMB buffer overflow, and an old
    leaky Wu-Ftpd server. These do not indicate that the GNU/Linux OS was or
    is at fault.

    This is more up to date, and definitely more well-known:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phishing

    You might also consider changing your ignoramus handle so you might
    possibly appear more believable. Learn to read. Learn to understand.
    Learn to ask questions instead of trying to impress others with your
    presumed wisdom.

    As for me, you now appear more like a troll than a misguided
    whippersnapper. I have no further use for you, so that means you join
    Frank on The List.


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  12. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    Moog wrote:

    > OK. So if someone rams a screwdriver into their eyeball, you would
    > blame the screwdriver. Right?



    Nah. He's more apt to point at the safety glasses laying on the work
    bench. ;-)

    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  13. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus



    "John F. Morse" wrote in message
    newsMXGj.47680$D_3.5719@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
    > Ignoramus17842 wrote:
    >
    >> Did you understand that phishing websites were running on compromised
    >> Linux servers?

    >
    >
    > Phishing sites are set up to phish. It matters not on what OS the
    > Webserver runs.
    >
    > The Linux servers aren't "compromised" at all. They are designed to phish.
    > The phishers just happened to choose a good OS for their shady operation.


    It did say rooted linux servers.. that sounds compromised to me.. maybe you
    have a different viewpoint.

    Its not really surprising if you think about it.. most servers are linux..
    most likely to be attacked are linux.. most likely to be compromised are
    linux.. its a success story if you think about it.





  14. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    John F. Morse wrote:

    > Ignoramus17842 wrote:




    > You might also consider changing your ignoramus handle so you might
    > possibly appear more believable. Learn to read. Learn to understand.
    > Learn to ask questions instead of trying to impress others with your
    > presumed wisdom.


    He's got the right name. Boy, is he dense.

    > As for me, you now appear more like a troll than a misguided
    > whippersnapper. I have no further use for you, so that means you join
    > Frank on The List.


    Can't say I'm surprised.
    --
    Mandriva 1 - 2008 - RC2 - 64bit OS.
    COLA trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/

  15. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    Moog writes:

    > Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >> "dennis@home" writes:

    >
    >>
    >>> If you need/want secure wireless using WEP you can setup a tunnel and
    >>> use IPSEC or similar to encrypt it. Anyone can connect to the wireless
    >>> but they aren't going anywhere. There are some nice wireless routers
    >>> with endpoint termination if you want to do it.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Yeah, ditto if he's using ssh over the link - perfectly safe then.

    >
    > Interesting. Like I said, I use WPA, but know someone with a WEP only
    > device. So there is a solution then.
    >
    > I'll let them know.
    >
    > Thanks BTW, Dennis.
    >


    But its probably more work then its worth. A new router is the way IMO.

    I can heartily recommend a

    DG834GTB netgear wireless modem.

    Although its not the cheapest.


  16. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    On 2008-03-28, dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >
    > "John F. Morse" wrote in message
    > newsMXGj.47680$D_3.5719@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
    >> Ignoramus17842 wrote:
    >>
    >>> Did you understand that phishing websites were running on compromised
    >>> Linux servers?

    >>
    >>
    >> Phishing sites are set up to phish. It matters not on what OS the
    >> Webserver runs.
    >>
    >> The Linux servers aren't "compromised" at all. They are designed to phish.
    >> The phishers just happened to choose a good OS for their shady operation.

    >
    > It did say rooted linux servers.. that sounds compromised to me.. maybe you
    > have a different viewpoint.


    His viewpoint does not seem to be in any way related to the fact that
    the servers are, as you pint out, rootkitted (or compromised enough to
    host spammer's webpages).

    > Its not really surprising if you think about it.. most servers are linux..
    > most likely to be attacked are linux.. most likely to be compromised are
    > linux.. its a success story if you think about it.


    That's all true, but, it shows that linux is not at all impervious to
    hacking.

    i

  17. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    On 2008-03-28, Moog wrote:
    > Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >> "dennis@home" writes:

    >
    >>
    >>> If you need/want secure wireless using WEP you can setup a tunnel and
    >>> use IPSEC or similar to encrypt it. Anyone can connect to the wireless
    >>> but they aren't going anywhere. There are some nice wireless routers
    >>> with endpoint termination if you want to do it.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Yeah, ditto if he's using ssh over the link - perfectly safe then.

    >
    > Interesting. Like I said, I use WPA, but know someone with a WEP only
    > device. So there is a solution then.


    It is a solution, but the person who gains unauthorized wifi access is
    still able to

    1) abuse your bandwidth
    2) expose you to legal problems

    What they would not be able to do, is capture your passwords. That is,
    unless you supply them through other means, e.g. samba shares or VNC
    passwords etc.

    i

  18. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    On 2008-03-28, Moog wrote:
    > Ignoramus17842 illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >
    >>
    >> Did you understand that phishing websites were running on compromised
    >> Linux servers?

    >
    > A website runninmg on a linux server? Who'd have thunk it?
    >
    > And as for "compromised", you probably mean "out of date AMP"


    The most likely reason would be a third party package that is not
    being updated properly.

    > Linux can not be held responsible for amateur users who do not patch
    > correctly. Just in the same way that the misuse of "Format C" and
    > "rm -rf" cannot be attributed to the OS in question.


    The word "responsible" is a little loaded emotionally. It can mean
    many things. A less emotionally charged way to see this, is to say
    "just because you run Linux, don't think that you cannot get hacked".

    > OK. So if someone rams a screwdriver into their eyeball, you would
    > blame the screwdriver. Right?


    Let's say that you go to a store and a salesman sells you a nice
    looking door lock. Based on incorrect ravings of fans of this door
    lock, you think that it is unbreakable, so you leave a big bag with
    cash in your living room, and advertise this.

    A thief comes and is able to pick the lock, and steals your cash.

    After this you realize that you should be more careful.

    Maybe you should not leave cash in your living room and use some extra
    locks and sturdier doors.

    i

  19. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus

    Frank wrote:
    > mark wrote:
    >
    >> DanS wrote:
    >>
    >>> mark wrote in news:qXXGj.4568$N_5.1668@trnddc05:
    >>>
    >>>>>> What a putz.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Hey mark, go fukk yourself...LOL!
    >>>>> You're not that bright you stupid asshole loser!
    >>>>> Frank
    >>>>
    >>>> A very well thought and intelligent reply. What a complete idiot you
    >>>> are.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Frank hasn't developed any new material in months.

    >>
    >> I just "met" him a few days ago. He really is a one trick pony. I'd
    >> send him a book of witty retorts but I doubt he can read. Thanks for
    >> the heads up.

    >
    > First thing you should try and do is to pull you head out of your
    > ass...LOL!
    > Can you?
    > Frank

    Boring. You are a boring brain-dead idiot.

  20. Re: Ubuntu & Antivirus



    "Hadron" wrote in message
    news:fsimit$aae$4@registered.motzarella.org...
    > Moog writes:
    >
    >> Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>> "dennis@home" writes:

    >>
    >>>
    >>>> If you need/want secure wireless using WEP you can setup a tunnel and
    >>>> use IPSEC or similar to encrypt it. Anyone can connect to the wireless
    >>>> but they aren't going anywhere. There are some nice wireless routers
    >>>> with endpoint termination if you want to do it.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Yeah, ditto if he's using ssh over the link - perfectly safe then.

    >>
    >> Interesting. Like I said, I use WPA, but know someone with a WEP only
    >> device. So there is a solution then.
    >>
    >> I'll let them know.
    >>
    >> Thanks BTW, Dennis.
    >>

    >
    > But its probably more work then its worth. A new router is the way IMO.
    >
    > I can heartily recommend a
    >
    > DG834GTB netgear wireless modem.
    >
    > Although its not the cheapest.
    >


    Its the device that doesn't support WPA, changing to that router won't help.
    Something like the linksys WRVS4400N will probably do the job as it
    terminates VPN tunnels, but you would need to check the manual to ensure you
    can terminate the wireless side as a separate network.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast