On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 22:09, James Sparenberg wrote: > On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 20:40, HaywireMac wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 20:36:09 -0700 > > James Sparenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> uttered: > > > > > yeah. I remember those scripts. Got a note that my windows box was > > > infected with some dang virus. Reported to the ISP that I don't run > > > windows. Got told that I must be doing it intentionally if I'm not > > > running windows. Tried to explain about something called spoofed > > > addresses, and paths. > > > > Read the link, he took that into account: > > > > "Upon reading the headers from the Gibe.F infected emails it was > > apparent that the virus does not spoof headers." > > > The word remember is an indication of past tense. Further enhanced by > the later word dropped. The reference was to a past result of this kind > of operation. Not a reference to it's applicability in this situation. > But to put it in plain terms. > > Closing the barn door after the cow is out doesn't keep the cow inside! > > This is a reactive solution. Not a preventative one. In order for a > reactive solution to work it requires system failure. Preventative > solutions on the other hand require no failure to be judged effective. > > James
and are therefore very difficult to judge, because proving a negative is a logical impossibility. This is particularly true in the realm of security, in which only some of the contestants are advertising what they've successfully done (with public notice or a big worm-borne exploit). The one that scares me is the one who makes a living quietly hacking in through non-publicized holes and taking what was wanted. You know, like Robert Redford in Sneakers. :-) -- Jack Coates Monkeynoodle: A Scientific Venture...
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
