Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-28 Thread Stephen Kühn
On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 04:35, David E. Fox wrote: > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 02:31:40 +1000 > Stephen Kühn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > "Save the attachment to your drive; un-tar/un-gzip it; cd into the virus > > directory; type sudo ./configure && make && make install; then run sudo > > /usr/bin

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-28 Thread David E. Fox
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 02:31:40 +1000 Stephen Kühn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Save the attachment to your drive; un-tar/un-gzip it; cd into the virus > directory; type sudo ./configure && make && make install; then run sudo > /usr/bin/virus" - sit back and watch your system fry." viruses should

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows? [OT]

2004-08-23 Thread Poogle
On Sunday 22 Aug 2004 23:45, Vincent Voois wrote: > Hmmz, i had a collegue with MCSE certificate that considered servers on a > hardware technical base were the same as desktop pc's. The guy was fired > after he excuted the system erase utility on a Compaq system, taken by the > hand by third leve

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-22 Thread Bryan Phinney
On Sunday 22 August 2004 06:45 pm, Vincent Voois wrote: > In this way you have a dedicated virus that does not depend upon a fixed IP > address but wether it's host offers access to the plain internet. But it > does require the virusmaker knowledge of networking and how the OS > structure looks li

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-22 Thread Vincent Voois
Bryan Phinney wrote: On Sunday 22 August 2004 02:14 pm, Vincent Voois wrote: Or by leaving it as it is. I believe Mandrake Linux is delivered with default firewall settings in a similar way XP's firewall is set by default. (turned off) Ah, so you don't remember selecting a security level when yo

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-22 Thread Bryan Phinney
On Sunday 22 August 2004 02:14 pm, Vincent Voois wrote: > Or by leaving it as it is. > I believe Mandrake Linux is delivered with default firewall settings in a > similar way XP's firewall is set by default. (turned off) Ah, so you don't remember selecting a security level when you installed Linu

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-22 Thread Vincent Voois
Bryan Phinney wrote: On Saturday 21 August 2004 01:21 pm, Vincent Voois wrote: And, since this is a Mandrake Linux mailing list, you should be aware that a Firewall wizard is built-in that is fairly complete and very good for setting up a standard default firewall. So again, I would say that se

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread JoeHill
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 19:37:54 -0500 Hoyt Bailey disseminated the following: > > But the old line about Linux being just as bad as Windows and we just > > don't know it because Linux isn't an active or worthy target is > > simply MS FUD. Plain and simple. If you bought into the FUD, you > > really

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Hoyt Bailey
On Saturday 21 August 2004 18:58, Bryan Phinney wrote: > On Saturday 21 August 2004 01:21 pm, Vincent Voois wrote: > But the old line about Linux being just as bad as Windows and we just > don't know it because Linux isn't an active or worthy target is > simply MS FUD. Plain and simple. If you bo

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread JoeHill
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:43:26 +0200 Frans Ketelaars disseminated the following: > From your posts it seems to me you are not a hacker but a cracker... ...or maybe just 'cracked' ;-) -- JoeHill RLU #282046 / www.freeyourmachine.org 20:31:02 up 17 days, 20:14, 8 users, load average: 1.67, 1.87, 1

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Bryan Phinney
On Saturday 21 August 2004 01:21 pm, Vincent Voois wrote: > Of course, this assumes there is no firewall between the net and Linux that > wouldn't catch the packet coming in. > This i explained in the end. No, I understand the technique of spoofing, my point was that sending out the packets to

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Frans Ketelaars
On Saturday 21 August 2004 19:21, Vincent Voois wrote: > For AFAIK, it always has been plain simple to hack a windows platform > using *NIX techniques and this is what i often do on occasion when > SID tables of NT servers got that corrupted that local admin isn't > able to log anymore with the

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows? [way OT]

2004-08-21 Thread JoeHill
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 12:03:31 -0600 Charlie Mahan disseminated the following: > > > ...because we're being inundated by MS Outlook, MS Outlook Express and > > > web-based email clients as opposed to the normal RFC standard text based > > > email clients properly configured? > > > > > > ...or maybe

Re: [newbie] Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Hoyt Bailey
On Saturday 21 August 2004 13:10, rikona wrote: > Hello Hoyt, > > Saturday, August 21, 2004, 10:52:59 AM, Hoyt wrote: > >> Okay okay, got the message... Netscape supports html too (if the > >> moron me does not deactivate it, that is), forgot most Linux > >> boxers here probably are still sticked t

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows? [way OT]

2004-08-21 Thread Charlie Mahan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday 21 August 2004 11:30:11, Vincent Voois wrote: > Stephen Kühn wrote: > > On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 02:03, Charlie Mahan wrote: > >>On the third hand (Moties anyone? ); A question, does anyone know why > >> the list is suddenly being astro-turfed

Re: [newbie] Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Vincent Voois
rikona wrote: Hello Hoyt, Saturday, August 21, 2004, 10:52:59 AM, Hoyt wrote: Okay okay, got the message... Netscape supports html too (if the moron me does not deactivate it, that is), forgot most Linux boxers here probably are still sticked to pine (sorry guys :P) HB> I don't think you know wha

[newbie] Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread rikona
Hello Hoyt, Saturday, August 21, 2004, 10:52:59 AM, Hoyt wrote: >> Okay okay, got the message... Netscape supports html too (if the >> moron me does not deactivate it, that is), forgot most Linux boxers >> here probably are still sticked to pine (sorry guys :P) HB> I don't think you know what you

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Hoyt Bailey
On Saturday 21 August 2004 12:30, Vincent Voois wrote: > Stephen Kühn wrote: > > On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 02:03, Charlie Mahan wrote: > >>On the third hand (Moties anyone? ); A question, does anyone > >> know why the list is suddenly being astro-turfed with html > >> messages? > >> > >>Charlie > > > >

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Stephen Kühn
On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 03:30, Vincent Voois wrote: > Stephen Kühn wrote: > > On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 02:03, Charlie Mahan wrote: > > > > > >>On the third hand (Moties anyone? ); A question, does anyone know why the > >>list is suddenly being astro-turfed with html messages? > >> > >>Charlie > > >

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Vincent Voois
Stephen Kühn wrote: On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 02:03, Charlie Mahan wrote: On the third hand (Moties anyone? ); A question, does anyone know why the list is suddenly being astro-turfed with html messages? Charlie ...because we're being inundated by MS Outlook, MS Outlook Express and web-based email

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Vincent Voois
Stephen Kühn wrote: On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 00:45, JoeHill wrote: On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:25:04 -0400 Bryan Phinney disseminated the following: Ahhh, right. I mean, why would a hacker bother to try to hit Linux when all he would manage to do is compromise thousand

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread J or M Montgomery
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:03:44 -0600 Charlie Mahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On the third hand (Moties anyone? ); Ah yes, Larry Niven Cheers John Montgomery Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrake

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Vincent Voois
Ahh... we're gonna have a ball now Bryan Phinney wrote: On Saturday 21 August 2004 06:33 am, Vincent Voois wrote: Well maybe netsky doesn't work in Linux. But it's still quite simple to scan linux deamons and send it spoofed ip packages (as if the packages came from 127.0.0.

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Stephen Kühn
On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 02:03, Charlie Mahan wrote: > On the third hand (Moties anyone? ); A question, does anyone know why the > list is suddenly being astro-turfed with html messages? > > Charlie ...because we're being inundated by MS Outlook, MS Outlook Express and web-based email clients as o

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Charlie Mahan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday 21 August 2004 08:45:08, JoeHill wrote: > On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:25:04 -0400 > > Bryan Phinney disseminated the following: > > Ahhh, right. I mean, why would a hacker bother to try to hit Linux when > > all he would manage to do is comprom

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Stephen Kühn
On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 00:45, JoeHill wrote: > On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:25:04 -0400 > Bryan Phinney disseminated the following: > > > Ahhh, right. I mean, why would a hacker bother to try to hit Linux when all > > he would manage to do is compromise thousands of machines that make up the > > entir

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread JoeHill
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:25:04 -0400 Bryan Phinney disseminated the following: > Ahhh, right. I mean, why would a hacker bother to try to hit Linux when all > he would manage to do is compromise thousands of machines that make up the > entire Internet backbone. I mean, what would be the good in,

Re: [newbie] W32.Netsky -> Linux really better protected than windows?

2004-08-21 Thread Vincent Voois
Stephen Kühn wrote: On Sat, 2004-08-21 at 05:01, Bryan Phinney wrote: I just got a virus mail that came to my system addressed to my email address that I use for this list. I suspect that someone has a windows machine for the list and that machine is compromised and is trying