That reminds me of the time I worked for a company that got massively infected cos the "Head of IT" (who incidentally knew nothing about computers) opened an "I love you" email and sent it to every one in the company.Originally Posted by dave87
He then sent out a diktat saying that it would be a sackable offence for anyone opening the "I love you email" (that his incompetence had produced) and exacerbating the problem. You couldn't make it up!
"Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.
An average dude with a dvd burner will know he can't copy DVDs, it won't work. Assuming the average dude doesn't type "CSS decrypt" in google, then CSS has done its job
I bought a CD from eBay with a load of like free tools for Xp
first one that caught my eye
DVD Decryptor
(quite useful for shinking down DVDs I have actually, means I can fit a family guy season on 1-2 dvd's instead of up to 4)
DISCLAIMER: I only use it for educational purposes, like seeing how big the ISO file is
Theres no need to say that... You are doing nothing illegal by backing up your own DVDs...
Ahh the old misonformed "Security because its got a fruit in its logo"
OSX doesn't get viruses because people dont bother writing them as they will have a very hard time spreading. Why? NOT because OSX is more secure - simply because there aren't anything like as many OSX machines as XP machines.
Things like virises, worms etc need a certain concentration of vunerable machines to spread properly. With OSX, there are automatically 20 times less machines than Xp machines to find.
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
ahh, the old misinformed "windows is only insecure because lots of people run it"Ahh the old misonformed "Security because its got a fruit in its logo"
OSX doesn't get viruses because people dont bother writing them as they will have a very hard time spreading. Why? NOT because OSX is more secure - simply because there aren't anything like as many OSX machines as XP machines.
Things like virises, worms etc need a certain concentration of vunerable machines to spread properly. With OSX, there are automatically 20 times less machines than Xp machines to find.
if a virus writer wants kudos from his peers, does he write yet another mydoom variant, or the first successful osx virus? so far, there hasn't been a single self-replicating one.
is $not_windows that uncommon? let's take slammer as an example. slammer had an enormous impact on the net, spreading throughout windows-based web servers. the minority of web servers that run windows, that is. if the most popular system was the target, then slammer would have been targeted against linux. yet it wasn't. how does that fit with your "popular means targeted" view? hint: it doesn't, because your argument has been debunked hundreds of times in the past
except in .uk, where it IS illegal
Never knew that
I didn't say that.
If you look at the post I was replying to, I was simply stating that writing a self replicating OSX virus that affects a decent number of machines is very difficult due to the lack of marketshare.
If Windows was on 5% of computers on the Net and OSX on 95%, do you not think there would be more OSX viruses than windows ones?
OSX has holes that can be exploited just like windows. Maybe not as many, but it is by no means perfect.
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
nice way to ignore my point - that if a virus writer wants notoriety (which they generally do) then "secure" osx is a better target. strangely, nobody's hit that target yet.
smack!
Hex, viruses targetting windows servers using an un-patched exploit is simple, as most of the configuration was the same. I do belive that had the biggest market share of x86 running, with the same configuration of admin accounts etc.
If you want too write a worm that will spread fast you want similar computers, windows gives you this, one of the major plus'es for commercial acceptance of SMEs. Virus writing now adays is totaly different too when i first became intrested in security research, gone is the "this won't matter" attitude, people actually bother sitting down and drawing out attack trees!
The point is this is a stupid debate because the OS that i belive is the safest too run on the web RISC OS, is soo pathetically insecure anyone with a grasp of debugging could find some exploit.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
bollocks.
Most viruses now adays are for commerical use.
Most people who want notoriety don't do it through mass replication viruses (enless they have a mental illness) because you won't get a slap on the wrists, its not 1980s anymore!
An OS is only as secure as its one weekness argument is a bit trickey, because its a case of what does that one weekness entail?
A while back some people used apple macs too show off a bug in wireless drivers that was present on most PCs, the nature of where the device driver was running ment that on OSX it had full control. The same was true of windows. They both lack segregation in kernel mode. Vista has started too bring this in, along with many other good ideas. OSX seams too be taking BSD, and making it insecure with badly designed code (most recently nicked from kounquer
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
YepNever knew that
I should have added backing up my own personally made dvd's featuring material I have solely produced lol
or why not just say your homemade pr0n?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
