>Once again, nobody said that. This is a very irritating habit you have. It
>happens so routinely that I have to wonder if it's intentional.

Then what was this?

>I've read about this estimate and this number was derived from looking at
>results in the worm's code itself, making this calculation dubious.  I'd
>place that number somewhere between WAG and spot-on.
>
>What's odd about the percentages of OS versions in the article I linked to
>is how much of it is Windows XP SP2, which turned on the firewall and
>auto-updates by default.  That tells me that the users of these machines
>received them either very poorly configured or they themselves intentionally
>disabled these security components.

I don't think reports of this fast-spreading worm were "dubious." 

I don't think it spreads because people "intentionally disabled these 
security components." There are multiple routes of attack.

Yes, truth telling can be "irritating," but spreading misinformation is 
both irritating and dangerous. The fact is that we have another major 
Windows infection in the wild. It does not hit all Windows machines, but 
it does hit a lot of them. 

Attack via autolaunch is particularly troubling to me. This happened to 
Apple back in the days of floppy disks and it was the only virus 
infection ever to hit my office. Apple promptly removed autolaunch and it 
hasn't been back since. Autolaunch trades a small benefit for a big risk. 
Computers should not do this.


*************************************************************************
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*************************************************************************

Reply via email to