Re: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments)
From: zac [EMAIL PROTECTED] This would be a valid comment if most people were aware of the problems that exist hidden in their email client. They aren't. a co-worker just hit a case of this very thing. At one of his jobs, he maintains software for a small firm. He gets a call in the past week telling him that for some reason the client's computer no longer works. He starts asking some questions (beginning with "did you run last night's backup - and they hadn't...). After a bit, he gets to 'what's the last successful thing you were doing' and they reply 'reading mail'. No problem, he thinks, because he has them using a web based mail system. Next question "have you installed anything new on the computer since I was last in"... reply was "oh yea - Outlook Express. What a neat program." A long shudder occurs. "Were you by any chance using Outlook Express last?" "Well, yes" comes the reply, "I said I was reading my mail". "And was there anything peculiar about any of the messages you were reading?" "Well, the last one said something about "I love you"... is there some problem with that?" You can guess the rest... -- Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem. Larry W. Virden mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.purl.org/NET/lvirden/ Even if explicitly stated to the contrary, nothing in this posting should be construed as representing my employer's opinions. -- ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments)
haha'at minimum and adequate computer user'. I have been doing development for 4 years (which may pale in comparison to some, but in that time I have seen a lot). A lot of the developers I have worked with in the past could barely install software on their machin without messing something up. As a whole most of the developers Ive known have been very careless. I do fnd that some of the best developers are the ones that have done it all, System Administration, Networking, as well as Development. I think its all comes from having to have served many purposes in the past. Developer, Sales Person, and at times Admin, Network Architect. Diversity leads to enlightenment=P My point in all of this was to point out that sometimes its the developers that are the BIGGEST offenders and not just the end user or Sales/Marketing people down the hall. -chris.alvarado [developer] - VerticalNet -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 5:47 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments) Anyone dumb enough to open attachments like this deserve everything they get... I think that¹s a bit harsh considering that the ultimate source of the error is the software developer that refuses to stop producing software with these moronic security holes in it. I feel compelled to respond to this. Admittedly, the openness and interrelatedness of Microsoft Office, Outlook, IE, and WSH make it easy to write relatively powerful viruses, the ultimate responsibility for safe computer use, like safe driving and safe sex, lies with the one behind the wheel. Microsoft, and sysadmins everywhere, can minimize virus problems with better software design, stronger security, better email filters, etc., but in the end, just like with computer security, computer virus protection boils down to common sense at the end-user level. How many people have received legitimate messages from someone they know (but aren't already in a relationship with) saying "I love you"? Are we all that desperate for love, that we'll just double-click blindly for it? How many people regularly receive salacious pictures of female tennis stars from their coworkers? If you want to look at that kind of stuff, the internet is filled to the brim with it - more free hardcore porn than you could ever look at. (Although personally, I feel that porn technology kind of peaked with VHS/DVD.) Why is it that we can expect adults to understand manual transmissions and 401K plans, but can't expect them to be smart enough to know, "Hey, this email I just got from Joe down the hall looks like it was written by a third-grader, and has a dirty picture attached. Maybe this is a virus, like the last thing I got from a coworker like this. Maybe I shouldn't double-click on the attachment." Microsoft software does what it always does - it tends toward openness at the expense of security. Guess what - that's what people want on their desktops. As someone who's done a bit of sysadmin work, I can tell you they don't want security. They want to be able to do whatever they want. The cost of that power is end-user responsibility. This goes even further for the people on this list. This is a developer list. We write network applications, which tie together very expensive web servers used by millions of people to even more expensive database servers. We use the same technology that makes these viruses work. Being a good developer means knowing how software works. Being a good developer means being, at minimum, an adequate computer user! Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments)
Dave, I can't argue that people want "openness" on their desktops, but I'm not sure I can go along with the notion that they're willing to sacrifice security. As one who lost over 700 files on my desktop to the Melissa virus (through no fault of my own), I for one want security. I really don't care what other users on my network want if, through carelessness, they are willing to risk my work. My time and my files are more valuable to me than other's convenience. What people want is not necessarily what they should be given. In other words, what's popular is not always what's right. Regards, --John ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments)
30 Million Lemmings can't be wrong -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 13 February 2001 15:29 To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments) Dave, I can't argue that people want "openness" on their desktops, but I'm not sure I can go along with the notion that they're willing to sacrifice security. As one who lost over 700 files on my desktop to the Melissa virus (through no fault of my own), I for one want security. I really don't care what other users on my network want if, through carelessness, they are willing to risk my work. My time and my files are more valuable to me than other's convenience. What people want is not necessarily what they should be given. In other words, what's popular is not always what's right. Regards, --John ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments)
Why not have someone else respond to this topic? It seems everyone else has. As far as group psychology goes in the Lemmings case. If you remember the movie Men In Black, Tommy Lee Jones has an interesting quote that applies, "A person is smart, people are stupid." Who can't read a little truth into that statement? Chris Maloney -Original Message- From: Daniel Lancelot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 9:43 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments) 30 Million Lemmings can't be wrong -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 13 February 2001 15:29 To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments) Dave, I can't argue that people want "openness" on their desktops, but I'm not sure I can go along with the notion that they're willing to sacrifice security. As one who lost over 700 files on my desktop to the Melissa virus (through no fault of my own), I for one want security. I really don't care what other users on my network want if, through carelessness, they are willing to risk my work. My time and my files are more valuable to me than other's convenience. What people want is not necessarily what they should be given. In other words, what's popular is not always what's right. Regards, --John ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: Dave's Burning Rant (WAS: virus comments)
Dave Watts wrote: Admittedly, the openness and interrelatedness of Microsoft Office, Outlook, IE, and WSH make it easy to write relatively powerful viruses, the ultimate responsibility for safe computer use, like safe driving and safe sex, lies with the one behind the wheel. This would be a valid comment if most people were aware of the problems that exist hidden in their email client. They aren't. How many people do you know who are aware of the WSH, what it can do and how to disable it if they want to? MS knows these features are insecure and they continue to ship Outlook with them enabled by default. How is it then the end users fault when the software does something untoward that they are not aware it can do? How many people have received legitimate messages from someone they know (but aren't already in a relationship with) saying "I love you"? Are we all that desperate for love, that we'll just double-click blindly for it? How many people regularly receive salacious pictures of female tennis stars from their coworkers? This isn't really the point though. The fact remains that some virus writer could put anything in the subject line. The choice of subjects and attachment material reflects more on the writer of the virus than anything else. Besides, wasn't there one virus that had a subject line similar to "Here is that information you requested"? Hardly anything lascivious there. -- The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never worshipped anything but himself. Sir Richard F. Burton email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.pixelgeek.com/ ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
