-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
>
> In which case, you're dumber than a box of rocks.
>
> Now shut up, and get a freaking clue.
> Sheesh!
>
>
Your contributions today (of which this is the last I have received) are
at best dera
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> In which case, you're dumber than a box of rocks.
>
> Windows malware often requires NO user action to cause damage,
> where as you have demonstrated your absolute REFUSAL to even
> understand that the security model of Unix/Linux (going all the
> way back to the 1970's) REQ
On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 01:52 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> >
> > I think we agree on the subject.
> >
> > Last thing - I dont think most virus/trojan/DOSattack writers do it
> > because its easy to do it in Windows (which it is), but because its got
> > a huge impact o
-- Original message --
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 07:38 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> >> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> >>> lware.
> >>>
> >>> Ok, tell me, seeing that I know nothing, if I can compromise
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 07:38 -0400, James Knott wrote:
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
lware.
Ok, tell me, seeing that I know nothing, if I can compromise a Linux
users home dir - why cant I send out spam?
I have never claimed such a thing is impossible, but it is far
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 13:42 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> A boot sector virus is executed every time the computer is booted. Any
> OS can be vulnerable to a boot sector virus during booting, because the
> OS is not running at that time. The only protection is what's provided
> with the BIOS. O
On Thursday 09 August 2007 15:18, James Knott wrote:
> Tero Pesonen wrote:
> > On Thursday 09 August 2007, Fergus Wilde wrote:
> >> he proprietary video formats issue is one for the lawyers, not Linux
> >> people. These formats don't play back because copyright and patent
> >> owners or abusers wil
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 11:16 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> >
> In the over thirty years I've been using computers, I've only once
> experienced a virus on my own computer. It was at work and I
> accidentlally left an infected floppy in my drive when I booted the
> computer. The IBMAV program I
James Knott wrote:
someone tried installing XP on a notebook and found he had no driver for
the NIC.
same for inboard motherboard, you must have the mobo cd. I even had a
config with the cd as /dev/hda and the Hd as /dev/hdb, and XP didn't
see the cd most of the time.
say:
* with with
On Thursday 09 August 2007, James Knott wrote:
> Tero Pesonen wrote:
> > On Thursday 09 August 2007, James Knott wrote:
> >>> ould be a problem to many others though.
> >>
> >> FWIW, a friend has an IBM ThinkPad, that came loaded with Windows
> >> 98. A couple of years ago, she upgraded to XP and f
Mike wrote:
On Thursday 09 August 2007 16:54, Tero Pesonen wrote:
FWIW, a friend has an IBM ThinkPad, that came loaded with Windows
98. A couple of years ago, she upgraded to XP and found she could
no longer play video DVDs. After some checking, we found that she
has to buy the necessary so
Clayton wrote:
FWIW, a friend has an IBM ThinkPad, that came loaded with Windows 98.
A couple of years ago, she upgraded to XP and found she could no longer
play video DVDs. After some checking, we found that she has to buy the
necessary software, from a web site that's very irritating and
diffi
On Thursday 09 August 2007 10:08, Mike wrote:
> On Thursday 09 August 2007 16:54, Tero Pesonen wrote:
> > > FWIW, a friend has an IBM ThinkPad, that came loaded with Windows
> > > 98. A couple of years ago, she upgraded to XP and found she could
> > > no longer play video DVDs. After some checking
Tero Pesonen wrote:
On Thursday 09 August 2007, James Knott wrote:
ould be a problem to many others though.
FWIW, a friend has an IBM ThinkPad, that came loaded with Windows 98.
A couple of years ago, she upgraded to XP and found she could no longer
play video DVDs. After some check
On Thursday 09 August 2007 18:05:05 Casey Stamper wrote:
> I know, I know! I was talking more about using it in Windows.
It's still open source on windows
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jdd wrote:
Roger Oberholtzer wrote:
On Thu, 2007-08-09 at 17:14 +0200, Casey Stamper wrote:
My favorite cross-platform player (closed source) is VLC Media
player. I've thrown many formats at it and it has never failed to
play them. You don't always have to jump through hoops to play
multimed
Roger Oberholtzer wrote:
On Thu, 2007-08-09 at 17:14 +0200, Casey Stamper wrote:
My favorite cross-platform player (closed source) is VLC Media player.
I've thrown many formats at it and it has never failed to play them. You
don't always have to jump through hoops to play multimedia. *You* hav
On Thu, 2007-08-09 at 17:14 +0200, Casey Stamper wrote:
>
> My favorite cross-platform player (closed source) is VLC Media player.
> I've thrown many formats at it and it has never failed to play them. You
> don't always have to jump through hoops to play multimedia. *You* have
> to decide if
Clayton wrote:
FWIW, a friend has an IBM ThinkPad, that came loaded with Windows 98.
A couple of years ago, she upgraded to XP and found she could no longer
play video DVDs. After some checking, we found that she has to buy the
necessary software, from a web site that's very irritating and
diffi
On Thursday 09 August 2007 16:54, Tero Pesonen wrote:
> >
> > FWIW, a friend has an IBM ThinkPad, that came loaded with Windows
> > 98. A couple of years ago, she upgraded to XP and found she could
> > no longer play video DVDs. After some checking, we found that she
> > has to buy the necessary
> > FWIW, a friend has an IBM ThinkPad, that came loaded with Windows 98.
> > A couple of years ago, she upgraded to XP and found she could no longer
> > play video DVDs. After some checking, we found that she has to buy the
> > necessary software, from a web site that's very irritating and
> > di
On Thursday 09 August 2007, James Knott wrote:
> Tero Pesonen wrote:
> > On Thursday 09 August 2007, Fergus Wilde wrote:
> >> he proprietary video formats issue is one for the lawyers, not Linux
> >> people. These formats don't play back because copyright and patent
> >> owners or abusers will not
Tero Pesonen wrote:
On Thursday 09 August 2007, Fergus Wilde wrote:
he proprietary video formats issue is one for the lawyers, not Linux
people. These formats don't play back because copyright and patent
owners or abusers will not allow free access to them and have
threatened and bullied, and
On Thursday 09 August 2007, Fergus Wilde wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 August 2007 20:52, Tero Pesonen wrote:
> [snip
>
> > I don't feel comfortable recommending Linux desktop to others.
> > Because when they will need help, I probably won't be able to help.
> > And they should not need help from me wit
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 20:52, Tero Pesonen wrote:
[snip
> I don't feel comfortable recommending Linux desktop to others. Because
> when they will need help, I probably won't be able to help. And they
> should not need help from me with basic issues such as burning disks or
> having some propri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-08-08 at 10:53 -0400, Michael Letourneau wrote:
> > No, screen savers are actually executable programs, not data. You normally
> > do not call them directly, but "something" does.
>
> My bad. But the idea is still pertinent and t
On Thursday 09 August 2007, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-08-07 16:21]:
> > Yes, very bizarre symptoms, I've never seen that, and I have suse
> > 10.2 installed on 8 computers including a couple of laptops. His
> > computer needs some service, there's something wrong.
* J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-08-07 16:21]:
> Yes, very bizarre symptoms, I've never seen that, and I have suse 10.2
> installed on 8 computers including a couple of laptops. His computer
> needs some service, there's something wrong.
Well, he *said* that he couldn't handle system administrat
James Knott wrote:
Tero Pesonen wrote:
I'd be too. But when the person asks me why they need to run alsaconf
as root after each reboot to get sound, I tell them I have no idea,
as I need to do it myself too. Or why they need to run k3b as root to
burn something. When they ask why this or tha
Tero Pesonen wrote:
On Wednesday 08 August 2007, Mike wrote:
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 19:03, Tero Pesonen wrote:
On Wednesday 08 August 2007, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
Kind of like using 2nd Graders to research in nuclear
fission/fusion.
You mean that the people who w
* Tero Pesonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-08-07 13:05]:
> Seriously, check your attitude. There's a world out there. And that
> world is not populated by Linux professionals. And no, these people
> are not 2nd graders. They are.. err.. computer users?
You *missed* it, but that ok, :^)
live in your
On Wednesday 08 August 2007, Mike wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 August 2007 19:03, Tero Pesonen wrote:
> > On Wednesday 08 August 2007, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > > Kind of like using 2nd Graders to research in nuclear
> > > fission/fusion.
> >
> > You mean that the people who would begin using Linux,
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 19:03, Tero Pesonen wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 August 2007, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> >
> > Kind of like using 2nd Graders to research in nuclear
> > fission/fusion.
>
> You mean that the people who would begin using Linux, should it ever
> grow popular on desktop, would n
On Wednesday 08 August 2007, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Tero Pesonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-08-07 12:04]:
> > They care very little about the Guru somewhere that preaches them how
> > the malware was unable to affect the system files, and how that
> > proves the security glory that is Linux. They
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 09:00, Tero Pesonen wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 August 2007, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> > On Wednesday 08 August 2007 00:34, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > > ...
>
> It isn't more complicated than that.
Yup. Simple, easy and wrong.
> Regards,
> Tero Pesonen
Randall Schul
* Tero Pesonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-08-07 12:04]:
> They care very little about the Guru somewhere that preaches them how
> the malware was unable to affect the system files, and how that proves
> the security glory that is Linux. They tell everyone how "a virus"
> "destroyed" their Linux, just
On Wednesday 08 August 2007, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 August 2007 00:34, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:27 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> > > ...
> >
> > Again! - deleting a user's files is a big thing, users see this as
> > the PC being broken!
>
> Do these us
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Tuesday 2007-08-07 at 14:30 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
BUT telling users to install Linux because it will help
for viruses is IMHO irresponsible.
Does anyone actually do that? I ca
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Tuesday 2007-08-07 at 17:38 +0200, jdd wrote:
in approx 25 years of computing, I _never_ had data corrupted by a virus, even
on windows.
Me neither.
Of course, I have been using Linux for close to the last then y
Carlos E. R. wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> The Tuesday 2007-08-07 at 15:59 -0400, Michael Letourneau wrote:
>
>> As more and more file types get linked to more applications I am not so
>> sure that "executing" something has the same meaning it used to. Say
>> you
>
Carlos E. R. wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> The Tuesday 2007-08-07 at 14:31 -0400, Michael Letourneau wrote:
>
>> But again, in either of those cases not being root does not necessarily
>> prevent your machine from being infected and/or the possible results
>> thereo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Tuesday 2007-08-07 at 15:59 -0400, Michael Letourneau wrote:
> As more and more file types get linked to more applications I am not so
> sure that "executing" something has the same meaning it used to. Say you
> download a new screen saver, you
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, G T Smith wrote:-
>David Bolt wrote:
>> All of which makes for an ideal method of introducing a trojan onto a
>> system[0]. And, just to make sure it works across the widest variety of
>> systems, all that's required is to create a statically linked 32bit
>> binary and it'll
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 00:34, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:27 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> > ...
>
> Again! - deleting a user's files is a big thing, users see this as
> the PC being broken!
Do these users think of having the contents of the trunk (boot) of their
car s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Bolt wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, Michael Letourneau wrote:-
>
>> David Bolt wrote:
>
>
>
>> As more and more file types get linked to more applications I am not so
>> sure that "executing" something has the same meaning it used to. Say you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Tuesday 2007-08-07 at 14:31 -0400, Michael Letourneau wrote:
> Yes true, not typically what is thought of executing though, and not
> really what my point was. My point was that everyone was talking about
> having to have the file be "executable
David Bolt wrote:
> All of which makes for an ideal method of introducing a trojan onto a
> system[0]. And, just to make sure it works across the widest variety of
> systems, all that's required is to create a statically linked 32bit
> binary and it'll run on virtually any x86-32 or x86-64 based sy
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 07:26 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:27 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> >
> >> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> >>
> >>> And... desktop users install all kinds of insane apps - when desktop
> >>> linux is popular - more apps
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 07:38 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > lware.
> >
> > Ok, tell me, seeing that I know nothing, if I can compromise a Linux
> > users home dir - why cant I send out spam?
> >
> >
> I have never claimed such a thing is impossible, but it is far mor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Tuesday 2007-08-07 at 14:30 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
>
> > BUT telling users to install Linux because it will help
> > for viruses is IMHO irresponsible.
>
> Does anyone actually do that? I can see the above as an a
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, Michael Letourneau wrote:-
>David Bolt wrote:
>As more and more file types get linked to more applications I am not so
>sure that "executing" something has the same meaning it used to. Say you
>download a new screen saver, you never really execute that, but your
>window man
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Tuesday 2007-08-07 at 17:38 +0200, jdd wrote:
> in approx 25 years of computing, I _never_ had data corrupted by a virus, even
> on windows.
Me neither.
Of course, I have been using Linux for close to the last then years, but
even before that
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> lware.
>
> Ok, tell me, seeing that I know nothing, if I can compromise a Linux
> users home dir - why cant I send out spam?
>
>
I have never claimed such a thing is impossible, but it is far more
difficult to do with Linux. In order to send out spam, something has
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:27 -0400, James Knott wrote:
>
>> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
>>
>>> And... desktop users install all kinds of insane apps - when desktop
>>> linux is popular - more apps will appear - increasing the risk of
>>> installing a malicious one.
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
Again! - deleting a user's files is a big thing, users see this as the
PC being broken!
if this was true, nobody should use Windows...
jdd
--
http://www.dodin.net
http://gourmandises.orangeblog.fr/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:31 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 01:35 -0800, John Andersen wrote:
> >
> >> On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> >>
> >>> But my main concern is that dumb users usually make up most of the
> >>> de
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:27 -0400, James Knott wrote:
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> >
> > And... desktop users install all kinds of insane apps - when desktop
> > linux is popular - more apps will appear - increasing the risk of
> > installing a malicious one.
> >
> >
>
> Any malware capable
On Tuesday 07 August 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> They said it makes no difference,
> it costs the same with or without Vista.
You need to ask more forcefully.
I get them without any os all the time.
Well they actually come with freedos but even that is
simply in the package, not on the
On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> Why is this not an issue with anyone? Deleting a normal users data is a
> big thing.
Obviously because any normal backup scheme will prevent such incidents.
This problem is already taken care of by your normal backup.
You do have a routine
David Bolt wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, Clayton wrote:-
>
>
>
>> This does not account for buffer overflow exploits etc...
>
> Of course, there's also those infections that occur without user
> intervention, but those tend to come in through security holes in server
> daemons which are unlikely
> On Tuesday 07 August 2007 09:28, Registration Account wrote:
> > > As you know clamAV provides NO realtime virus detection
> > > and from time to time we all need to execute a clamscan
> > > - Well I just performed a clamscan and found 4 folder
> > > which a year or so stored and catagorised emai
David Bolt wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, Clayton wrote:-
>
>
>
>>This does not account for buffer overflow exploits etc...I seem to
>>remember one recently (in the past year) that would give you root
>>access to a remote machine... scary except that you had to be root
>>already to get into the stat
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, Clayton wrote:-
>This does not account for buffer overflow exploits etc...I seem to
>remember one recently (in the past year) that would give you root
>access to a remote machine... scary except that you had to be root
>already to get into the state where the exploit could be
> But again, in either of those cases not being root does not necessarily
> prevent your machine from being infected and/or the possible results
> thereof. Everyone remembers Melissa,
> http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-1999-04.html, if that were designed for
> a Linux system, not being root would
jdd wrote:
James Knott wrote:
A boot sector virus is executed every time the computer is booted.
Any OS can be vulnerable to a boot sector virus during booting
my old thunderbyte anti-vir software replaced the boot sector by it's
own and kept an md5sum of it, preventing such attack. I hope
James Knott wrote:
> Michael Letourneau wrote:
>> I think people are confusing virus with Trojan. From my old PC support
>> days, most of the virii that were in the wild were tied to Office
>> documents, or existed on boot sectors of floppies and hard drives.
>> Nothing to "execute" there. I thin
James Knott wrote:
A boot sector virus is executed every time the computer is booted. Any
OS can be vulnerable to a boot sector virus during booting
my old thunderbyte anti-vir software replaced the boot sector by it's
own and kept an md5sum of it, preventing such attack. I hope moderns
sy
Michael Letourneau wrote:
I think people are confusing virus with Trojan. From my old PC support
days, most of the virii that were in the wild were tied to Office
documents, or existed on boot sectors of floppies and hard drives.
Nothing to "execute" there. I think it would be pretty easy for
James Knott wrote:
> Bottom line, you're ignoring all the technical differences that make
> Windows a wide open target, in comparison to Linux or Unix. No amount
> of dumb users will overcome that fact. Then, good practices will go
> further to reduce that risk and also it is virtually impossible
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
Why is this not an issue with anyone? Deleting a normal users data is a
big thing. They consider the PC broken if their files disappear.
That's a minor issue, compared to some of the other things malware can
do. Stuff such as stealing passwords and other person
Tero Pesonen wrote:
On Tuesday 07 August 2007, jdd wrote:
Tero Pesonen wrote:
Not necessarily. I believe there were macro viruses for MS Excell
in approx 25 years of computing, I _never_ had data corrupted by a
virus, even on windows.
Sure, but you're not an average user either.
may be, I
On Tuesday 07 August 2007, jdd wrote:
> Tero Pesonen wrote:
> > Not necessarily. I believe there were macro viruses for MS Excell
>
> in approx 25 years of computing, I _never_ had data corrupted by a
> virus, even on windows.
Sure, but you're not an average user either.
Regards,
Tero Pesonen
--
Tero Pesonen wrote:
Not necessarily. I believe there were macro viruses for MS Excell
in approx 25 years of computing, I _never_ had data corrupted by a
virus, even on windows.
This don't mean I never got virus, but I always see it before any
damage done. I have seen many computer destruc
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 01:35 -0800, John Andersen wrote:
On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
But my main concern is that dumb users usually make up most of the
desktop market out there - and preaching to them that Linux will make
there virus pro
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
And... desktop users install all kinds of insane apps - when desktop
linux is popular - more apps will appear - increasing the risk of
installing a malicious one.
Any malware capable of causing significant damage i.e. beyond the users
files etc., will require ro
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
Again, Im only talking about Desktop Linux, not servers - web users dont
have logons, email and web-browsing on arb webservers - so it remains
dumb user proof.
But my main concern is that dumb users usually make up most of the
desktop market out there - and preaching to
On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Kai Ponte wrote:
> On Tue, August 7, 2007 1:28 am, Registration Account wrote:
> > As you know clamAV provides NO realtime virus detection
> > and from time to time we all need to execute a clamscan
> > - Well I just performed a clamscan and found 4 folder
> > which a yea
On Tuesday 07 August 2007 16:50, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> >
> > She was all freaked out about some phishing emails she got and
> > thought for sure she was infected. (My son had launched AMOR and
> > had dropped her wireless mouse receiver behind the desk. As a
> > result, her mouse movements w
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 07:27 -0700, Kai Ponte wrote:
> On Tue, August 7, 2007 1:28 am, Registration Account wrote:
> > As you know clamAV provides NO realtime virus detection
> > and from time to time we all need to execute a clamscan
> > - Well I just performed a clamscan and found 4 folder
> > wh
On Tue, August 7, 2007 1:28 am, Registration Account wrote:
> As you know clamAV provides NO realtime virus detection
> and from time to time we all need to execute a clamscan
> - Well I just performed a clamscan and found 4 folder
> which a year or so stored and catagorised emails and
> all 4 fold
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:42 +, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> I'm just "preaching" caution - just as I don't tell people to use
> Linux
> because its free, money wise or as in freedom, most of them are
> skeptical about "free stuff", and the other really not care about tech
> freedom (wrongly so,
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 01:35 -0800, John Andersen wrote:
>
> What would YOU SUGGEST we "preach" to them?
>
>
Hans, we preach Braaivleis, Boerewors, Biltong & Chevrolet; i.e. don't
worry, be happy ...
:-)
Al
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL
On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Per Jessen wrote:
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > Well, that what I started with - a desktop environment - in desktop
> > environments there are basically only one user - so messing with
> > his/her docs/mail etc is just as bad as wiping the /lib dir?
>
> Not at all. If
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> BUT telling users to install Linux because it will help
> for viruses is IMHO irresponsible.
Does anyone actually do that? I can see the above as an additional
argument for someone who's about to switch to Linux, but surely it's
not the main reason.
/Per Jessen, Z
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> Well, that what I started with - a desktop environment - in desktop
> environments there are basically only one user - so messing with
> his/her docs/mail etc is just as bad as wiping the /lib dir?
Not at all. If a user manages to screw up his/her home-directory, you
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 10:40 +0200, Clayton wrote:
>
>> On 8/7/07, Registration Account <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> As you know clamAV provides NO realtime virus detection
>>> and from time to time we all need to execute a clamscan
>>> - Well I just performe
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 18:24 +0800, Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
> On 08/07/2007 05:49 PM, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > Again - the SETUP will involve removing windows and installing a flavour
> > of linux to curb the effects of viruses.
> And it does help, not in the future but in the present.
> > T
Registration Account wrote:
> As you know clamAV provides NO realtime virus detection
> and from time to time we all need to execute a clamscan
> - Well I just performed a clamscan and found 4 folder
> which a year or so stored and catagorised emails and
> all 4 folders were infected with
> Phishin
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
Why is it assumed that Linux is less prone to virus attacks?
* Windows is stuck by it's history. Original windows (3.11, 95 or 98)
had no idea of what security mind. So many application programmers
used to store they user data in the application folder (for example)
On 08/07/2007 05:49 PM, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> Again - the SETUP will involve removing windows and installing a flavour
> of linux to curb the effects of viruses.
And it does help, not in the future but in the present.
> The FALL will be when they
> click yes to something they dont understan
On Tuesday 07 August 2007 09:28, Registration Account wrote:
> As you know clamAV provides NO realtime virus detection
> and from time to time we all need to execute a clamscan
> - Well I just performed a clamscan and found 4 folder
> which a year or so stored and catagorised emails and
> all 4 fol
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 01:35 -0800, John Andersen wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > But my main concern is that dumb users usually make up most of the
> > desktop market out there - and preaching to them that Linux will make
> > there virus problem go away is setting
On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> But my main concern is that dumb users usually make up most of the
> desktop market out there - and preaching to them that Linux will make
> there virus problem go away is setting them up for a fall.
I fail to see how it sets them up for a fal
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:30 +0200, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 01:15 -0800, John Andersen wrote:
> > On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > > If/When Linux makes it big-time on the desktop do you think it will also
> > > be bogged down with virus attacks as
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 01:15 -0800, John Andersen wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> > If/When Linux makes it big-time on the desktop do you think it will also
> > be bogged down with virus attacks as MS is now.
>
> No.
> The reason windows is attacked is because its
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Registration Account wrote:
> As you know clamAV provides NO realtime virus detection
> and from time to time we all need to execute a clamscan
> - Well I just performed a clamscan and found 4 folder
> which a year or so stored and catagorised emails a
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:08 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
> Hans van der Merwe wrote:
>
> > Why is it assumed that Linux is less prone to virus attacks?
>
> Primarily due to a better and much more ingrained security system. Do
> you normally run as root on your Linux desktop? Well, that what's a
On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> If/When Linux makes it big-time on the desktop do you think it will also
> be bogged down with virus attacks as MS is now.
No.
The reason windows is attacked is because its EASY, not JUST because its
popular. Believing otherwise is swallowin
Hans van der Merwe wrote:
> Why is it assumed that Linux is less prone to virus attacks?
Primarily due to a better and much more ingrained security system. Do
you normally run as root on your Linux desktop? Well, that what's a
Windows user normally does on his Windows ditto.
> I know to inst
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 10:40 +0200, Clayton wrote:
> On 8/7/07, Registration Account <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As you know clamAV provides NO realtime virus detection
> > and from time to time we all need to execute a clamscan
> > - Well I just performed a clamscan and found 4 folder
> > which
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
