Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Stephen Russell]

What part of this do I not want to trust?

-- 
Stephen Russell
Sr. Production Systems Programmer
SQL Server DBA
Web and Winform Development
Independent Contractor
Memphis TN

901.246-0159


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/c4313dbe0909290940l49eb1891l8f6f15d1ff979...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Ed Leafe]

On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:40 AM, Stephen Russell wrote:

> 
>
> What part of this do I not want to trust?


Anti-virus for free? Can you say 'Ubuntu'?


-- Ed Leafe





___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/6640e374-b81f-4610-8f1c-c83a3331b...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[MB Software Solutions General Account]

Ed Leafe wrote:
> On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:40 AM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
>> 
>>
>> What part of this do I not want to trust?
>
>
>   Anti-virus for free? Can you say 'Ubuntu'?


Saw an article the other day that suggested the virus writers are
targeting Macs more nowadays.  Is it only a matter of time until the
next target is Ubuntu, or is that O/S structured in such a way to be
immune to a virus attack?

-- 
Mike Babcock, MCP
MB Software Solutions, LLC
President, Chief Software Architect
http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com
http://fabmate.com
http://twitter.com/mbabcock16





___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4717.96.244.169.16.1254284559.squir...@webmail.dssco.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

MB Software Solutions General Account wrote:
> Saw an article the other day that suggested the virus writers are
> targeting Macs more nowadays.  Is it only a matter of time until the
> next target is Ubuntu, or is that O/S structured in such a way to be
> immune to a virus attack?

No OS is immune. One OS can't seem to defend themselves without massive 
defenses 
slowing down their systems.

There are regular proof-of-concept attacks on Linux and Mac, but they never 
seem to 
go anywhere.

I wonder why that is, too.

Paul


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac2d243.4010...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Ed Leafe]

On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:22 PM, MB Software Solutions General Account  
wrote:

> Saw an article the other day that suggested the virus writers are
> targeting Macs more nowadays.  Is it only a matter of time until the
> next target is Ubuntu, or is that O/S structured in such a way to be
> immune to a virus attack?


I don't think that anyone would be naive enough to claim that any  
networked computer would be "immune" to an attack. But the point is  
that *nix was designed from the outset to be a networked OS, so it is  
inherently not as vulnerable as a Windows box. There are still many  
exploits that can be found in apps that can compromise the box, no  
matter what OS - even OS X or Ubuntu. It's just a much higher bar to  
clear.


-- Ed Leafe





___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/f121777e-b2b1-450e-b55c-ebe109922...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Geoff]

A well-balance reply. the idea that any OS is immune is ridiculously naive -
unless you make an OS so secure that you cant actually do anything with it!

-Original Message-
From: profox-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Ed Leafe
Sent: Wednesday, 30 September 2009 1:11 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:22 PM, MB Software Solutions General Account  
wrote:

> Saw an article the other day that suggested the virus writers are
> targeting Macs more nowadays.  Is it only a matter of time until the
> next target is Ubuntu, or is that O/S structured in such a way to be
> immune to a virus attack?


I don't think that anyone would be naive enough to claim that any  
networked computer would be "immune" to an attack. But the point is  
that *nix was designed from the outset to be a networked OS, so it is  
inherently not as vulnerable as a Windows box. There are still many  
exploits that can be found in apps that can compromise the box, no  
matter what OS - even OS X or Ubuntu. It's just a much higher bar to  
clear.


-- Ed Leafe





[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/008001ca4180$479e5aa0$d6db0f...@com.au
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Ed Leafe wrote:
> On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:22 PM, MB Software Solutions General Account  
> wrote:
> 
>> Saw an article the other day that suggested the virus writers are
>> targeting Macs more nowadays.  Is it only a matter of time until the
>> next target is Ubuntu, or is that O/S structured in such a way to be
>> immune to a virus attack?
> 
> 
>   I don't think that anyone would be naive enough to claim that any  
> networked computer would be "immune" to an attack. But the point is  
> that *nix was designed from the outset to be a networked OS, so it is  
> inherently not as vulnerable as a Windows box. There are still many  
> exploits that can be found in apps that can compromise the box, no  
> matter what OS - even OS X or Ubuntu. It's just a much higher bar to  
> clear.

Let's also not forget that there's a big market for anti-virus and anti-spyware 
software for Windows machines (and next to no market for these on Mac and 
Linux).

So even if the AV companies aren't directly writing exploits, it sure is in 
their 
best interests for exploits to keep appearing, and for the image to be that AV 
is 
necessary.

I've been running my WinXP box for years now with no AV installed, and no virus 
infections. Every now and then I run a scan of the filesystem using ClamAV on 
Linux, 
and sure it finds some virus email attachments, but they've never been run so 
there 
wasn't any harm done.

I've only recently installed AV software on my client's network, because of 
some 
minor spyware problems over the past few months. This is after over 10 years of 
them 
being on the Internet with Windows NT, 2K, and XP.

So there's definitely hype over virus threats, but there's also some best 
practices 
we've followed, such as having a robust perimeter firewall, not running IE or 
Outlook/Outlook Express, having good spam filtering, turning off Windows File 
and 
Print Sharing (because they are unnecessary and dangerous), not letting normal 
users 
write to the Windows or Program Files directories (a policy I've had in place 
the 
entire time), using secure tunnels, and also having trained, educated users.

Try turning off your background AV sometime. You may be pleasantly surprised at 
how 
much nicer it is to work on your machine.

Paul


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac2d604.1060...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Geoff wrote:
> A well-balance reply. the idea that any OS is immune is ridiculously naive -
> unless you make an OS so secure that you cant actually do anything with it!

Any OS is secure if you cut off all external input. IOW, no internet, no USB, 
no 
keyboard. :)

Paul



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac2d667.9080...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Geoff]

granted... but in the connected world, an unconnected computer loses so much
of its value thus reinforcing my point that security can only be obtained by
reducing its effectiveness a great deal.

-Original Message-
From: profox-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Paul McNett
Sent: Wednesday, 30 September 2009 1:24 PM
To: profox@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

Geoff wrote:
> A well-balance reply. the idea that any OS is immune is ridiculously naive
-
> unless you make an OS so secure that you cant actually do anything with
it!

Any OS is secure if you cut off all external input. IOW, no internet, no
USB, no 
keyboard. :)

Paul



[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/008101ca4182$036783f0$0a368b...@com.au
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Geoff]

i somehow got the Coolsearch hijacker some years ago and was totally unable
to remove it. given that it is reported to hijack your browser and send you
to places that could give you jail time, I rebuilt my windows machine from
scratch. not all viruses are merely annoying.

-Original Message-
From: profox-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Paul McNett
Sent: Wednesday, 30 September 2009 1:23 PM
To: profox@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

Ed Leafe wrote:
> On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:22 PM, MB Software Solutions General Account  
> wrote:
> 
>> Saw an article the other day that suggested the virus writers are
>> targeting Macs more nowadays.  Is it only a matter of time until the
>> next target is Ubuntu, or is that O/S structured in such a way to be
>> immune to a virus attack?
> 
> 
>   I don't think that anyone would be naive enough to claim that any  
> networked computer would be "immune" to an attack. But the point is  
> that *nix was designed from the outset to be a networked OS, so it is  
> inherently not as vulnerable as a Windows box. There are still many  
> exploits that can be found in apps that can compromise the box, no  
> matter what OS - even OS X or Ubuntu. It's just a much higher bar to  
> clear.

Let's also not forget that there's a big market for anti-virus and
anti-spyware 
software for Windows machines (and next to no market for these on Mac and
Linux).

So even if the AV companies aren't directly writing exploits, it sure is in
their 
best interests for exploits to keep appearing, and for the image to be that
AV is 
necessary.

I've been running my WinXP box for years now with no AV installed, and no
virus 
infections. Every now and then I run a scan of the filesystem using ClamAV
on Linux, 
and sure it finds some virus email attachments, but they've never been run
so there 
wasn't any harm done.

I've only recently installed AV software on my client's network, because of
some 
minor spyware problems over the past few months. This is after over 10 years
of them 
being on the Internet with Windows NT, 2K, and XP.

So there's definitely hype over virus threats, but there's also some best
practices 
we've followed, such as having a robust perimeter firewall, not running IE
or 
Outlook/Outlook Express, having good spam filtering, turning off Windows
File and 
Print Sharing (because they are unnecessary and dangerous), not letting
normal users 
write to the Windows or Program Files directories (a policy I've had in
place the 
entire time), using secure tunnels, and also having trained, educated users.

Try turning off your background AV sometime. You may be pleasantly surprised
at how 
much nicer it is to work on your machine.

Paul


[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/008201ca4182$4cd26050$e67720...@com.au
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Ajoy Khaund]

Yep maybe we should connect the AV when we are on the internet or something.


Regards

Ajoy Khaund
Neamati Road
Near Bhogdoi Bridge
Jorhat 785001-21
Assam, India

Tel: 91-376-2351288
Cell: 91-94350-92287
Mail: akha...@hotmail.com
Mail: akha...@gmail.com
http://teaanalyst.blogspot.com/

"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if
both are frozen."
- Edward  V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"

--
From: "Paul McNett" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:22 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

> Ed Leafe wrote:
>> On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:22 PM, MB Software Solutions General Account
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Saw an article the other day that suggested the virus writers are
>>> targeting Macs more nowadays.  Is it only a matter of time until the
>>> next target is Ubuntu, or is that O/S structured in such a way to be
>>> immune to a virus attack?
>>
>>
>> I don't think that anyone would be naive enough to claim that any
>> networked computer would be "immune" to an attack. But the point is
>> that *nix was designed from the outset to be a networked OS, so it is
>> inherently not as vulnerable as a Windows box. There are still many
>> exploits that can be found in apps that can compromise the box, no
>> matter what OS - even OS X or Ubuntu. It's just a much higher bar to
>> clear.
>
> Let's also not forget that there's a big market for anti-virus and 
> anti-spyware
> software for Windows machines (and next to no market for these on Mac and 
> Linux).
>
> So even if the AV companies aren't directly writing exploits, it sure is 
> in their
> best interests for exploits to keep appearing, and for the image to be 
> that AV is
> necessary.
>
> I've been running my WinXP box for years now with no AV installed, and no 
> virus
> infections. Every now and then I run a scan of the filesystem using ClamAV 
> on Linux,
> and sure it finds some virus email attachments, but they've never been run 
> so there
> wasn't any harm done.
>
> I've only recently installed AV software on my client's network, because 
> of some
> minor spyware problems over the past few months. This is after over 10 
> years of them
> being on the Internet with Windows NT, 2K, and XP.
>
> So there's definitely hype over virus threats, but there's also some best 
> practices
> we've followed, such as having a robust perimeter firewall, not running IE 
> or
> Outlook/Outlook Express, having good spam filtering, turning off Windows 
> File and
> Print Sharing (because they are unnecessary and dangerous), not letting 
> normal users
> write to the Windows or Program Files directories (a policy I've had in 
> place the
> entire time), using secure tunnels, and also having trained, educated 
> users.
>
> Try turning off your background AV sometime. You may be pleasantly 
> surprised at how
> much nicer it is to work on your machine.
>
> Paul
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/3da85d2bfd6c443ea173e73855100...@compaq
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Geoff wrote:
> granted... but in the connected world, an unconnected computer loses so much
> of its value thus reinforcing my point that security can only be obtained by
> reducing its effectiveness a great deal.

I dunno. Look at Linux and Mac. They are effective and have much better track 
records 
on the security front.

Paul



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac2dd5d.7080...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Allen]

Maybe it's because they are not so popular hence no point in attacking.
Al

-Original Message-


I don't think that anyone would be naive enough to claim that any  
networked computer would be "immune" to an attack. But the point is  
that *nix was designed from the outset to be a networked OS, so it is  
inherently not as vulnerable as a Windows box. There are still many  
exploits that can be found in apps that can compromise the box, no  
matter what OS - even OS X or Ubuntu. It's just a much higher bar to  
clear.




___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/001501ca419b$56cc8220$046586...@com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Stephen Russell]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Ajoy Khaund  wrote:
> Yep maybe we should connect the AV when we are on the internet or something.
---

You cannot change the kernel of your OS on the fly so you cannot just
add in AV as needed.



-- 
Stephen Russell
Sr. Production Systems Programmer
SQL Server DBA
Web and Winform Development
Independent Contractor
Memphis TN

901.246-0159


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/c4313dbe0909300538o4cb01ee1s40d2f4514ffce...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Stephen Russell]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Allen  wrote:
> Maybe it's because they are not so popular hence no point in attacking.


Why waste the time on only 1% of the market for one OS when you can go
after Win... and achieve 70% market.

-- 
Stephen Russell
Sr. Production Systems Programmer
SQL Server DBA
Web and Winform Development
Independent Contractor
Memphis TN

901.246-0159


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/c4313dbe0909300540y65e625cblb74cb91eff5d0...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Ricardo Aráoz]

Stephen Russell wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Allen  wrote:
>   
>> Maybe it's because they are not so popular hence no point in attacking.
>> 
> 
>
> Why waste the time on only 1% of the market for one OS when you can go
> after Win... and achieve 70% market.
>
>   
LOL
Yeah, virus people are only interested in market share. Good try! Keep
it up!




--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac3d886.5050...@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Alan Bourke]

Installed user base is definitely a factor - if you want a nice army of
compromised machines to do what people actually do with them, like DDOS
attacks, then it makes sense to go after Windows. 
-- 
  Alan Bourke
  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1254398077.30765.1337538...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Stephen Russell]

2009/9/30 Ricardo Aráoz :
> Stephen Russell wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Allen  wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe it's because they are not so popular hence no point in attacking.
>>>
>> 
>>
>> Why waste the time on only 1% of the market for one OS when you can go
>> after Win... and achieve 70% market.
>>
>>
> LOL
> Yeah, virus people are only interested in market share. Good try! Keep
> it up!
--

Pull your head out of 

Virus writers not only want to gain credit for something big within
their respective community, they are also planting seeds for secondary
use later.  Will that seed return login data to banks and networks or
will it be used as a DOS drone?  Having great numbers is the incentive
for the intended software.


-- 
Stephen Russell
Sr. Production Systems Programmer
SQL Server DBA
Web and Winform Development
Independent Contractor
Memphis TN

901.246-0159


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/c4313dbe0910010705q252cdc5fmd6f1eea76c66e...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Alan Bourke wrote:
> Installed user base is definitely a factor - if you want a nice army of
> compromised machines to do what people actually do with them, like DDOS
> attacks, then it makes sense to go after Windows. 

Although an army of compromised Linux machines would have much more powerful 
and 
capable tools at their disposal.

Paul


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac4bf15.80...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Nicholas Geti]

Another dumbass remark from Ricardo.

- Original Message - 
From: "Ricardo Aráoz" 
To: "ProFox Email List" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE


> Stephen Russell wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Allen  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe it's because they are not so popular hence no point in attacking.
>>>
>> 
>>
>> Why waste the time on only 1% of the market for one OS when you can go
>> after Win... and achieve 70% market.
>>
>>
> LOL
> Yeah, virus people are only interested in market share. Good try! Keep
> it up!
>
>



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/985b517f50b64dfda11ab88d25224...@dual
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Allen]

They are all pc's so what's the difference? Windows or Linux compromised is
a bad thing. I think sometimes the want to hate Microsoft makes the
headsoft.
Al

-Original Message-
From: profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On
Behalf Of Paul McNett
Sent: 01 October 2009 16:39
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

Alan Bourke wrote:
> Installed user base is definitely a factor - if you want a nice army of
> compromised machines to do what people actually do with them, like DDOS
> attacks, then it makes sense to go after Windows. 

Although an army of compromised Linux machines would have much more powerful
and 
capable tools at their disposal.

Paul




___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/001e01ca42c1$ec21f450$c465dc...@com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Allen wrote:
 > Behalf Of Paul McNett
>> Although an army of compromised Linux machines would have much more powerful
>> and 
>> capable tools at their disposal.
> They are all pc's so what's the difference? Windows or Linux compromised is
> a bad thing. I think sometimes the want to hate Microsoft makes the
> headsoft.

All I meant to say is that most Linux distros come with hundreds of 
command-line 
tools to analyze, send, modify network packets, running programs, etc. These 
tools 
could be used by a successful Linux exploit, simplifying the ability to cause 
damage.

Windows doesn't come with such easy-to-use, powerful tools.

Paul


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac50b38.3070...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Paul McNett wrote:
> Allen wrote:
>  > Behalf Of Paul McNett
>>> Although an army of compromised Linux machines would have much more powerful
>>> and 
>>> capable tools at their disposal.
>> They are all pc's so what's the difference? Windows or Linux compromised is
>> a bad thing. I think sometimes the want to hate Microsoft makes the
>> headsoft.
> 
> All I meant to say is that most Linux distros come with hundreds of 
> command-line 
> tools to analyze, send, modify network packets, running programs, etc. These 
> tools 
> could be used by a successful Linux exploit, simplifying the ability to cause 
> damage.
> 
> Windows doesn't come with such easy-to-use, powerful tools.

Also, I don't want to hate Microsoft. I simply choose to use tools from 
developers 
that I trust, and try to show people that they really aren't locked in, even if 
they 
feel they are.

Paul



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac50c37.4030...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[William Sanders / EFG]

Author: Paul McNett 
Subject: Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE
Posted: 2009/10/01 10:39:17Alan Bourke wrote:
> Installed user base is definitely a factor - if you want a nice army of
> compromised machines to do what people actually do with them, like DDOS
> attacks, then it makes sense to go after Windows.

Although an army of compromised Linux machines would have much more
powerful and
capable tools at their disposal.

Paul

Ya - there was a problem with TrixBox images, which was built on a CentOS
distro.  For about 11 months, someone had hacked the codebase , the hack
got INTO the images, ppl downloaded it all, used it. If the machine was
live on the internet, it called home, did some stuff.  I can't remember
WHAT that stuff was, but one of my test machines got hit. Two Clients got
hit, also...

It was a PITA.

I like TrixBox - just did a cool hack with dbf data on a flagship (thats
the name of the compiler ) system.  My Prior trixbox installs and hacks 
were mostly VFP/Wintel 'reads' on the call detail records in that mySql
instance (boring, I know, but... )

Anyway - TrixBox is stable this year .. Yeah  This is what, my 4th
year of support with it?



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/3590.69.154.179.84.1254427922.squir...@efgroup.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Allen]

I wonder why it hasn't happened. The free source code nature of Linux would
seem to shout for attack.
Al

-Original Message-
From: profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On
Behalf Of Paul McNett


All I meant to say is that most Linux distros come with hundreds of
command-line 
tools to analyze, send, modify network packets, running programs, etc. These
tools 
could be used by a successful Linux exploit, simplifying the ability to
cause damage.

Windows doesn't come with such easy-to-use, powerful tools.

Paul



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/002d01ca42d8$804b0610$80e112...@com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Allen wrote:
> I wonder why it hasn't happened. The free source code nature of Linux would
> seem to shout for attack.

It seems to me to be another sign that *nix is much more secure at the 
OS/network level.

Paul


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac51dfb.1080...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Allen]

I don't know. Maybe but I still believe it's the majority os winning the
attention. And certainly many web site have been hit by hackers, and we are
told most of those are "nix"
Al

-Original Message-
From: profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On
Behalf Of Paul McNett
Sent: 01 October 2009 23:24
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

Allen wrote:
> I wonder why it hasn't happened. The free source code nature of Linux
would
> seem to shout for attack.

It seems to me to be another sign that *nix is much more secure at the
OS/network level.

Paul




___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/002e01ca42e0$ed00ca80$c7025f...@com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Gene Wirchenko]

At 13:08 2009-10-01, Paul McNett  wrote:

[snip]

>Also, I don't want to hate Microsoft. I simply choose to use tools 
>from developers
>that I trust, and try to show people that they really aren't locked 
>in, even if they
>feel they are.

  Paul, I think you are limiting yourself unnecessarily.  I am 
willing to buy products from Microsoft even though I trust them to be 
untrustworthy.  If I just need a throwaway program where reliability, 
etc. is not an issue, I am prepared to buy a Microsoft product.  If I 
have to count on it, I am much less likely to.

  Windows XP with my latest box was the last Microsoft product I 
purchased.   Mind you, had Windows 98 still been available, I would 
have been fine with that.  Just before that was VFP 9. Before then, 
there were (in some order) Office 97, Windows 98, Publisher 97, and 
Windows 95.  Please pardon the long list.  This goes back about twelve years.

  Microsoft obviously considers their self-interest very much 
ahead of mine.  I have learned to return the favour.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/20091001214633.606b398...@marge.leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> At 13:08 2009-10-01, Paul McNett  wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
>> Also, I don't want to hate Microsoft. I simply choose to use tools 
>>from developers
>> that I trust, and try to show people that they really aren't locked 
>> in, even if they
>> feel they are.
> 
>   Paul, I think you are limiting yourself unnecessarily.  I am 
> willing to buy products from Microsoft even though I trust them to be 
> untrustworthy.  If I just need a throwaway program where reliability, 
> etc. is not an issue, I am prepared to buy a Microsoft product.  If I 
> have to count on it, I am much less likely to.
> 
>   Windows XP with my latest box was the last Microsoft product I 
> purchased.   Mind you, had Windows 98 still been available, I would 
> have been fine with that.  Just before that was VFP 9. Before then, 
> there were (in some order) Office 97, Windows 98, Publisher 97, and 
> Windows 95.  Please pardon the long list.  This goes back about twelve years.
> 
>   Microsoft obviously considers their self-interest very much 
> ahead of mine.  I have learned to return the favour.

Why should I choose to use tools from a developer I don't trust, when there are 
open 
choices that I do trust?

I purchase Microsoft products, too. I need to, to test my software on my 
customers' 
preferred OS.

Paul



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac524ba.2070...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Gene Wirchenko]

At 14:52 2009-10-01, Paul McNett  wrote:

[snip]

>Why should I choose to use tools from a developer I don't trust, 
>when there are open
>choices that I do trust?

 No reason, but there might not be open choices (whatever you 
mean by this) in a particular area.

>I purchase Microsoft products, too. I need to, to test my software 
>on my customers'
>preferred OS.

  "Yes, I bought a Microsoft product.  I just could not help 
myself."  

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/20091001220947.e181298...@marge.leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul Hill]

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Paul McNett  wrote:
> Allen wrote:
>> I wonder why it hasn't happened. The free source code nature of Linux would
>> seem to shout for attack.
>
> It seems to me to be another sign that *nix is much more secure at the 
> OS/network level.

There have been *nix worms that infected many 1000s of machines you know...

-- 
Paul


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/17cad13c0910011559x4a0a41fcl5be2b1286ced...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Paul Hill wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Paul McNett  wrote:
>> Allen wrote:
>>> I wonder why it hasn't happened. The free source code nature of Linux would
>>> seem to shout for attack.
>> It seems to me to be another sign that *nix is much more secure at the 
>> OS/network level.
> 
> There have been *nix worms that infected many 1000s of machines you know...

Yes, but why is malware *such* a huge issue on Windows, and of such little 
worry on *nix?

Paul


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac53e14.6000...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> At 14:52 2009-10-01, Paul McNett  wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
>> Why should I choose to use tools from a developer I don't trust, 
>> when there are open
>> choices that I do trust?
> 
>  No reason, but there might not be open choices (whatever you 
> mean by this) in a particular area.

There may not be other choices in a particular area, such as some proprietary 
driver 
to communicate with some proprietary device (like a security camera DVR, for 
instance). In which case, I use the available tools.

Paul


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac53e65.4060...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Gene Wirchenko]

At 16:42 2009-10-01, Paul McNett  wrote:
>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> > At 14:52 2009-10-01, Paul McNett  wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >> Why should I choose to use tools from a developer I don't trust,
> >> when there are open
> >> choices that I do trust?
> >
> >  No reason, but there might not be open choices (whatever you
> > mean by this) in a particular area.
>
>There may not be other choices in a particular area, such as some 
>proprietary driver
>to communicate with some proprietary device (like a security camera DVR, for
>instance). In which case, I use the available tools.

  Which is about what I said.  Apart from OSs, Microsoft is quite 
easily avoided.  For OSs, there is lock-in.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/20091002003034.03d4a98...@marge.leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Paul McNett]

Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>   Which is about what I said.  Apart from OSs, Microsoft is quite 
> easily avoided.  For OSs, there is lock-in.

Excel isn't so easy to avoid, in the real world where all my clients use it and 
I 
must automate it.

Paul


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4ac552aa.90...@ulmcnett.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Alan Bourke]

Office 2007, Visual Studio 2008, all unreliable, right.

I can guarantee you they're at least as resilient as any OSS equivalent
that I've seen.
-- 
  Alan Bourke
  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1254474606.22380.1337698...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Brought to you by the people who gave you IE

[Gene Wirchenko]

At 18:08 2009-10-01, Paul McNett  wrote:
>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> >   Which is about what I said.  Apart from OSs, Microsoft is quite
> > easily avoided.  For OSs, there is lock-in.
>
>Excel isn't so easy to avoid, in the real world where all my clients 
>use it and I
>must automate it.

  Gleep!  I forgot about that.  I have a bit of Outlook 
automation in my system myself.

set friday on
  How about I just call it quits for a couple of days?

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/20091002210050.6722c98...@marge.leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.