Forum Home
Press F1
 
Thread ID: 22282 2002-07-16 06:21:00 The irony of Anti-Virus Erin Salmon (626) Press F1
Post ID Timestamp Content User
63024 2002-07-16 12:36:00 Ask anyone who has been infected with a virus if they were not made aware of it either by someone advising them or by problems showing up with with their programs or operating system.
I can be sure as all the viruses that are currently affecting Windows systems do not affect me.

Playstations running IE and OE are not affected. 		Jim B (153)
63025 2002-07-16 15:22:00 > > If 95%+ of people used Mac OS (or Linux for that
> > matter) all the viruses would be written for it .
>
> Maybe, but there would be less people doing it .
> Because it would be much harder to do,
> especially with open source software .

Why would it be harder to do?

> Think about it,
> people would be spending more time testing their code
> before release - don't forget that people who code
> Linux do it for the love of it and not to make a
> quick buck . They are a dedicated bunch of people
> who's main goal is provide a safe, secure, and
> user-friendly environment to interface a human with a
> computer .

I know I would rather fly in a plain designed by an engineer than one made by a 2nd year Biology student in his spare evenings .


>
> > There will always be exploits for software as it
> is
> > impossible to get code perfect the first time .
>
> No it's not . It may be difficult, but not impossible .
> I have released software that I made on my own
> computer . Not one has ever been sent back with a bug .
> Admittedly, they were hardly OS stuff, (actually they
> were novelty / gag / prank stuff)

Has you code been subjected to buffer overflow analysis or race condition testing?


> but people who work
> with Linux, for example, work this way - in 'modules'
> so to speak .

Is that so . . . ? I didn't know this . What are you talking about again?


> Another thing to think about - what OS do you think
> that the people who write viruses commonly use? Bet
> ya it's not windoze . Without windoze, whats left?

I suppose they must do it with blind luck and a cross compiler then . 		BIFF (1)
63026 2002-07-16 15:55:00 playstation?, which one, BIFF or the one directly above you. and the post about not having to do patches, updates, not having av software, now that i think about it, ever since i got the av software, all we have been getting are virus alerts ( well, maybe bout once a month), and before that, we had no problems with our computer.....not saying we didnt have viruses, but we didnt have problems (got the av software on a reccomendation, and it found several files infected, but apparently no damage of any kind.) so now here i am downloading more updates...grrr

heard the one bout the av software programmers actually writing some of the viruses............... 		sal (67)
63027 2002-07-16 23:07:00 Don't be so smug about using Eudora, Play Station or even Linux.

The simple fact is keep up to date with news (IDG news is all you need to keep up to date with these stuff).

Then you need to keep your program updated. That means apply all security patches. Inconvenient??? Yes, so are the burglars and murderers roaming our street. You simply need to be aware of these dangers once you are connected to the information highway.

Years ago I frequently advise users ;

1) "You may open the email to check but please DO NOT double click on the attachment."

NOTE: - this advice no longer apply today because the virus will launch if you open the email (even if you didn't launch the attachment).


2) "Be suspicious of emails with weird or non-relevant subjects"

NOTE: - this advice no longer apply today because they can pick up a random subject from the infected person's inbox and send it to you. Chances are they will contain a title which is very relevant.


3) "Send an email back to the sender letting him/her know he/she is infected"

NOTE: - this advice no longer apply today because new virus will spoof the email address. So sending an email to the sender will only create more confusion.


Here are some basic facts. On business email servers with filters and anti-virus running, I've seen 10 or more virus on a quiet day and probably a hundred or more during a mass infection.

Here is another fact. There weren't any virus for PDAs, cellphone, Linux etc. Well wrong! They are appearing and they will always be there. 		nzStan (440)
63028 2002-07-16 23:26:00 > > Maybe, but there would be less people doing it.
> > Because it would be much harder to do,
> > especially with open source software.
>
> Why would it be harder to do?

It is well documented that Linux security is tighter than a Nun's XXXX.

> I know I would rather fly in a plain designed by an
> engineer than one made by a 2nd year Biology student
> in his spare evenings.

Personally, I'd rather fly in a plane that has been designed, built and tested by a wide and diverse range of people than one built by someone who never was an engineer, but a businessman who has bought a plane made out of paper mache, covered it with paint, and sold it as an airliner....

Apologies for the long sentence :)

> Has you code been subjected to buffer overflow
> analysis or race condition testing?

Don't most of the bugs in wondows suffer from this problem? :D

> 'modules'
> > so to speak.
>
> Is that so...? I didn't know this. What are you
> talking about again?

I don't really know. I could have sworn I started off on something about Linux... perhaps you'd be best talking to people who do it (www.ele.auckland.ac.nz).


> I suppose they must do it with blind luck and a cross
> compiler then.

Well I'll give you a clue. It's not a playstation...

:p 		Elwin Way (229)
63029 2002-07-17 02:13:00 What have Microsoft done? Lots . They're a great company . They have a Developers subscription thing which (for money) you get the new stuff in time to make applications ready for the release . MS managed to provide pre-virused (Klez) software on some of their CDs . How's that for service?

There is a well known weakness called "buffer overflow" . It slows things down a bit if you test for this .

MS want to produce fast code, so they tend to not test for things which will never happen, like buffer overflow . They release the OS or the application, and people find that they get virused . MS issue a critical patch . People find that viruses get in through the weakness introduced by the fix . MS issue . . .

A year goes by, then it's time for a new, better, safer, (more expensive) OS . To make it fast, MS don't test for things which will never happen, like buffer overflow . . .

It's called "reinventing the wheel" . Or gross incompetence . Or something . ;-)

There is a news group which is well worth reading: comp . risks . It's been going for a long time . A lot of the stories are funny . Some of them would be funny if they weren't so serious . (It's all true) . 		Graham L (2)
63030 2002-07-17 07:27:00 > It is well documented that Linux security is tighter
> than a Nun's XXXX.

Please produce some factual evidence to prove that Linux security is any more tight than any NT Kernel based Windows system. If you actually knew what you were were talking about you'd know that Linux has more exploits produced per year than any other OS. And this is despite it's non majority market share.


> Personally, I'd rather fly in a plane that has been
> designed, built and tested by a wide and diverse
> range of people than one built by someone who never
> was an engineer, but a businessman who has bought a
> plane made out of paper mache, covered it with paint,
> and sold it as an airliner....

By this sentence I presume you are under the mistaken idea that Bill Gates actually writes his own code rather than employing professional programmers.

> > Has you code been subjected to buffer overflow
> > analysis or race condition testing?
>
> Don't most of the bugs in wondows suffer from this
> problem? :D

And most of the bugs in Linux too.

You are a Linux fanboy. I however like *all* OS' and realise each has it's own strengths. 		BIFF (1)
63031 2002-07-17 07:32:00 > > Why would it be harder to do?
>
> It is well documented that Linux security is tighter
> than a Nun's XXXX.

that's debatable. It's well documented now, because there isn't the security risk involved with something like Windows - why? because people spend all their time writing exploits for Win based systems. But to take it back to that scenario, if 95% of the population was using Linux, then people would be exploiting it more than they are. 		Mike (15)
63032 2002-07-18 02:02:00 Any AV program must be almost always out of date, coz they work by recognising something already documented. No-on gets protected until many have been infected. A check on executables in email progs would be a better way to do it Doesn't have to throw a wobbly on every prog. trying to run but one launching from an email yes. mark c (247)
1 2 3