All you nut-jobs who think you are immune to viruses

Shay Stephens

It is my opinion that you are deluding yourself and setting yourself up for nasty surprises in the very near future. Be you Linux, Mac, or Windows you are a nutter butter peanut butter cookie if you think you can skip around blindly, safe from viruses.

Just because something has not happened, does not mean it can't happen.

As I have postulated in the past, it is just a matter of time before any ad all computers are hit by a virus. You need to take steps to mitgate the risk. Act as if your computer is vulnerable, and you stand a better chance of not getting one in first place, or if you do, by not being destroyed by it.

Case in point (again):
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/04/30/apple.security.ap/index.html?section=cnn_topstories

If nothing else, please, for me, make a backup of your important can't-live-without data, today!

Bob Bell

Shay Stephens wrote:

It is my opinion that you are deluding yourself and setting yourself up for nasty surprises in the very near future. Be you Linux, Mac, or Windows you are a nutter butter peanut butter cookie if you think you can skip around blindly, safe from viruses.

Just because something has not happened, does not mean it can't happen.

As I have postulated in the past, it is just a matter of time before any ad all computers are hit by a virus. You need to take steps to mitgate the risk. Act as if your computer is vulnerable, and you stand a better chance of not getting one in first place, or if you do, by not being destroyed by it.

Case in point (again):
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/04/30/apple.security.ap/index.html?section=cnn_topstories

If nothing else, please, for me, make a backup of your important can't-live-without data, today!

I thought you were going to give me the 5th degree about bird flu since I spends hours around them for pictures.

Was this meant to be a reply to something else instead of being a new thread? To your statement, I make DVD's of my images all the the time. At this very moment, I am caught up to friday. I have like 500 shots from saturday to edit and burn. Oh and I run 2 antivirus programs, use firefox and thunderbird.

I am very very afraid of my computer getting sick, I don't know what variety of kleenex it likes.

Shay Stephens

Bob Bell wrote:

I am very very afraid of my computer getting sick, I don't know what variety of kleenex it likes.

I updated the subject line to be a little more clear ;-)

And good to hear about your backup progress :-)

Richard

Shay Stephens wrote:

If nothing else, please, for me, make a backup of your important can't-live-without data, today!

I certainly agree that no system is immune to virus or other malware infection. However, if you take simple precautions, you can greatly reduce the risk--regardless of the operating system you are using. I run Windows, but I am much more worried about losing data due to hardware failure than to viruses. Fortunately, having a solid, tested backup method in place addresses both concerns.

Forget all the Windows vs. Mac nonsense for a moment. If aliens from the planet Zork abducted your computer, would you lose everything? If so, it's time to back up your data. 'Cause I read on the Web somewhere that they're on their way .

Regards,

Bob Bell

rsinmadrid wrote:

I certainly agree that no system is immune to virus or other malware infection. However, if you take simple precautions, you can greatly reduce the risk--regardless of the operating system you are using. I run Windows, but I am much more worried about losing data due to hardware failure than to viruses. Fortunately, having a solid, tested backup method in place addresses both concerns.

Forget all the Windows vs. Mac nonsense for a moment. If aliens from the planet Zork abducted your computer, would you lose everything? If so, it's time to back up your data. 'Cause I read on the Web somewhere that they're on their way .

Regards,

Really? I read that all your file are belong to them.

gus

rsinmadrid wrote:

If aliens from the planet Zork abducted your computer, would you lose everything? If so, it's time to back up your data. 'Cause I read on the Web somewhere that they're on their way .

Regards,

We are currently waiting at immigration ..some enviromental red-tape they are squeeling about our vehicle operating a pairing quark positron drive unit over populated areas.

Justiceiro

You know Bill Gates has a whole team of deep cover black hackers working on a Mac Virus.

mercphoto

Shay, it's not that the Mac (or Linux) is immune. They aren't. But compared to Windows they both have very healthy immune systems. Windows does not. Windows is simply more vulnerable to attack.

Someone put it to me this way. All operating systems are configurable, and each paritcular configuration has its set of security holes. Some big, some small. But what Microsoft does is ship its operating system with most the doors and windows left unlocked (because that gives the user more functionality) and expects the user to lock the doors they want locked. OS-X and Linux, on the other hand, ship with the doors locked and expect you to open the ones you need opened.

Imagine buying house, which "realtor" do you want to buy your next house from?

Speaking as a computer scientist myself, Macs are not immune (nothing is). However, there is no doubt that they are substantially less vulnerable than Windows. And that should be enough reason for people to switch.

Shay Stephens

mercphoto wrote:

Shay, it's not that the Mac (or Linux) is immune. They aren't.

But people think and act as if they are. That is my point. I am not comparing the relative strength or weakness of any one platform (I use Linux), I am just pointing out the dangerous thought that one would be immune based on what OS one uses. We are all vulnerable to viruses and should act accordingly regardless of how stong our "immune system" is.

StevenV

Shay Stephens wrote:

But people think and act as if they are.

*sigh* and Apple's marketing folk just keep pushing the mindset. Here's one of the new ads this week. I think this sort of thing is just begging to come along and bite 'em on the asterisk.

It's fine to say "safer" and point out that there have been more problems with the other guy's OS, but the perception is that Apple's saying they're safe.

I'm a Mac person as well as a Windows user (and Unix and VMS and and and...), yes the Mac has been hit less than Windows has and yes the OS design choices made by Apple's development seem to have been better ones... but there ain't nothin' 100% safe.

There's a car commercial - I forget which one - out now that does the same thing, talking about 'wrapping a bubble of safety' around the driver/passenger, keeping them from having accidents. That's bung too.

Mike Lane

From this month's Harpers magazine.

Chance that an unprotected PC gets a virus within 1 hour of connecting to the internet: 9 in 10

Khaos

I've administrerd Novell domains and Windows domains. Novell had everything locked down at start, and windows has everything opened at start. Why? http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=2946&tag=nl.e622

Because americans are lazy, that's why. Make it easy or lose customers.

mercphoto

Khaos wrote:

I've administrerd Novell domains and Windows domains. Novell had everything locked down at start, and windows has everything opened at start. Why? http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=2946&tag=nl.e622

Because americans are lazy, that's why. Make it easy or lose customers.

Exactly. Interesting article. Not only lazy, but we're expecting painless solutions to our most pressing problems. Computer security and identity theft. Oil and the Mid-East. Social security. Medicare. The national debt. I used to have a girlfriend from Canada who is quite shocked and very worried about our future.

CatOne

Shay Stephens wrote:

It is my opinion that you are deluding yourself and setting yourself up for nasty surprises in the very near future. Be you Linux, Mac, or Windows you are a nutter butter peanut butter cookie if you think you can skip around blindly, safe from viruses.

Just because something has not happened, does not mean it can't happen.

As I have postulated in the past, it is just a matter of time before any ad all computers are hit by a virus. You need to take steps to mitgate the risk. Act as if your computer is vulnerable, and you stand a better chance of not getting one in first place, or if you do, by not being destroyed by it.

Case in point (again):
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/04/30/apple.security.ap/index.html?section=cnn_topstories

If nothing else, please, for me, make a backup of your important can't-live-without data, today!

ROFL. This article (and a flurry of them) stem from the fact that "AT LEAST" two guys came up with the problem):

http://daringfireball.net/2006/05/good_journalism

These people are trying to create news.

Note I'm not saying the platform is immune. But your comment is, again, sensationalism.

Shay Stephens

You three are making my point. Here the focus is supposed to be on what the user can do to reduce the risk of getting a virus, and you are still fixated on the OS and how insecure Windows is compared to Linux or Mac.

You are missing the point! Don't look at the OS for to be your savior, look at what you can do to protect yourself. It's personal guys. Stop obsessing about the OS. All OS's will have vulnerabilities, sooner or later it will happen. So what are you going to do when it happens hmmmm???

mercphoto

Shay I'm not sure if you have Mac envy or you're just trying to validate buying a PC by shouting "see, you're vulnerable too!"

Shay Stephens wrote:

You three are making my point. Here the focus is supposed to be on what the user can do to reduce the risk of getting a virus, and you are still fixated on the OS and how insecure Windows is compared to Linux or Mac.

No I'm not. Read on...

You are missing the point! Don't look at the OS for to be your savior, look at what you can do to protect yourself. It's personal guys. Stop obsessing about the OS. All OS's will have vulnerabilities, sooner or later it will happen. So what are you going to do when it happens hmmmm???

What I am fixated on is not the OS per se. What I'm fixated on is whether the OS vendor that I am sending my money to gives a damn about my security. That is the position I have, at least.

Why in the world should I support a company like Microsoft with my hard-earned cash? They could ship their software more securely, but they don't. As I said in my analogy, I wouldn't buy a house from a builder that left the doors unlocked and expected me to lock them. Nor will I buy from a software vendor who does the equivalent.

Besides, speaking again as a computer scientist, Windows is inherintly, by design, less secure than either Linux or Mac. There is no escaping that. Windows cannot be made as secure.

Now, given that all OS's have vulnerabilities, why in the world not choose the most secure choice you can?

DavidTO

Speaking personally, I don't feel immune, just pretty safe.

There's been recent problems with virus software that has done far more damage and been a higher risk than any Mac virus out there, so I stay away from the software for now. One app was mistakenly identifying files as infected, and depending on how you had it configured, could wipe perfectly safe files from your drive. No thanks.

There are plenty of things that I do in life that have risks associated with them, yet I still do them. Right now I'm pretty sure that my chances of being involved in an auto accident are greater than my being infected by a Mac virus, yet I still drive.

I'm careful, I back up, and I don't run around like chicken little every time there's a scare running around on the net.

It's not that OSX is invulnerable, I just like the odds. There's an old saying, you lay with dogs, you get fleas. Well, you may get fleas even if you don't lay with dogs, but your chances are much, much reduced. To me, using Windows is like laying with dogs.

And, I agree with you. No OS will keep you entirely safe. You have to be careful. To my mind, part of being careful is staying away from Windows.

devbobo

mercphoto wrote:

Besides, speaking again as a computer scientist, Windows is inherintly, by design, less secure than either Linux or Mac. There is no escaping that. Windows cannot be made as secure.

wow...that's was very wide sweeping statement. Hope you are going to provide some sort of detail to backup such a grandious claim.

And you use the term "Windows" so liberally...which flavour are you referring to ? Or are you talking in more scientific generalistic type manner ?

devbobo

DavidTO wrote:

You have to be careful. To my mind, part of being careful is staying away from Windows.

That argument is like saying, I am going to sell my car and get a motorcycle, since more people are killed driving cars.....so motorcycles must be safer. It's not about the vehicle, it's how you drive it.

mercphoto

devbobo wrote:

wow...that's was very wide sweeping statement. Hope you are going to provide some sort of detail to backup such a grandious claim.

Do a google.

bwg

mercphoto wrote:

Do a google.

oooooh Dev...how you gonna deal with THAT!

:lurk

devbobo

mercphoto wrote:

Do a google.

umm ok...but ur the one that was putting urself forward as an authorative figure.

So does that mean as a "Computer Scientist" your wealth of knowledge is limited to googled results of some biased slashdot articles ?

I am very interested in what are the inherent flaws in Windows (in your opinion)..other than the same old lame argument that they are closed-source.

Bob Bell

devbobo wrote:

umm ok...but ur the one that was putting urself forward as an authorative figure.

So does that mean as a "Computer Scientist" your wealth of knowledge is limited to googled results of some biased slashdot articles ?

I am very interested in what are the inherent flaws in Windows (in your opinion)..other than the same old lame argument that they are closed-source.

I think its interesting as well. I run win2k on 3 machines with SP4. Have firefox on all of them and use thunderbird for email. I have very few issues and the ones I do have AVG and AdAware take care of.

I really doubt windows has more flaws than any other OS, its just more people are trying to find them to exploit. I doubt any OS out there could hold up to 10,000 people looking for holes on a daily basis.

mercphoto

devbobo wrote:

So does that mean as a "Computer Scientist" your wealth of knowledge is limited to googled results of some biased slashdot articles ?

Geez. I'm speaking with someone with experience with VMS, AIX, several flavors of unix, three version of Mac OS, and a few versions of DOS and Windows.

I don't care about open source or closed source. I'm not sure why you think I do. Arguments that open source make software better are flawed, in my opinion. There is just as much open source junk as there is closed source.

Windows has always been behind the curve in terms of stability and security. It was a big selling point of OS/2, which really was a better, more stable and more secure version of Windows. Do you know why a large number bank teller ATM machines run OS/2 rather than Windows? Think about that. Its not because it makes the ATM cheaper to run and install...

When the Intel processors first got protection mode Microsoft did a lazy man's approach to taking advantage of what the processor had to offer. As just one example all open applications shared a common local descriptor table. Here is this nice protection mechanism that the hardware gives you by letting each process have its own, protected LDT. But M$ says "nah, too hard, we'll just have one". Well, really bad idea if you want a stable, secure operating system.

In a prior version of Windows, M$ gave the user the ability to say that certain file types are trusted and can be automatically opened, whereas other types would require the OS ask first. Great idea, poor implementation. You could hide an executable with a .jpg extension, which were usually trusted files. But the code in the OS that recognizes file type would inspect the file and determine "that's not a JPG, that's an executable" and then open anyway. Lovely huh? On Mac OS-X if a program downloads, through my browser for example, the OS requires that I either be logged in as root or have the root password before it will allow the program to launch. That's a big step to being secure.

Dude, quit dreaming that Windows is not a piece of crap.

bwg

mercphoto wrote:

Geez. I'm speaking with someone with experience with VMS, AIX, several flavors of unix, three version of Mac OS, and a few versions of DOS and Windows.

I don't care about open source or closed source. I'm not sure why you think I do. Arguments that open source make software better are flawed, in my opinion. There is just as much open source junk as there is closed source.

Windows has always been behind the curve in terms of stability and security. It was a big selling point of OS/2, which really was a better, more stable and more secure version of Windows. Do you know why a large number bank teller ATM machines run OS/2 rather than Windows? Think about that. Its not because it makes the ATM cheaper to run and install...

When the Intel processors first got protection mode Microsoft did a lazy man's approach to taking advantage of what the processor had to offer. As just one example all open applications shared a common local descriptor table. Here is this nice protection mechanism that the hardware gives you by letting each process have its own, protected LDT. But M$ says "nah, too hard, we'll just have one". Well, really bad idea if you want a stable, secure operating system.

In a prior version of Windows, M$ gave the user the ability to say that certain file types are trusted and can be automatically opened, whereas other types would require the OS ask first. Great idea, poor implementation. You could hide an executable with a .jpg extension, which were usually trusted files. But the code in the OS that recognizes file type would inspect the file and determine "that's not a JPG, that's an executable" and then open anyway. Lovely huh? On Mac OS-X if a program downloads, through my browser for example, the OS requires that I either be logged in as root or have the root password before it will allow the program to launch. That's a big step to being secure.

Dude, quit dreaming that Windows is not a piece of crap.

i'm not smart enough to challenge your architecture claims, but you really do your credibility a disservice when you refer to microsoft as M$.

Every 12yr old on slashdot does that.

at least you spelled 'flavors' the right way.

Shay Stephens

Why do you keep bringing up windows and OS's??? I am trying to talk about users and their mentality, the kind that goes "I'm immune, clickety clickety click...oh nooooooo!"

You are fixated on Windows for some reason that I can't crack through. I am not comparing OS's between each other. I don't care if you are running Linux, Mac, or Windows. All of them have zero day exploits out there just waiting for an oportune time to strike.

So I am trying to warn people not fall into a false sense of security. It is being marketed heavily right now, I just saw an insipid commercial tonight lulling people into a security slumber.

Do backups, don't open questionable programs, don't respond to spam or other scams, assume you are vulnerable and you will stand a better chance of spotting an attack or scam.

Assume you are safe, and you are at far more risk.

mercphoto wrote:

Geez. I'm speaking with someone with experience with VMS, AIX, several flavors of unix, three version of Mac OS, and a few versions of DOS and Windows.

I don't care about open source or closed source. I'm not sure why you think I do. Arguments that open source make software better are flawed, in my opinion. There is just as much open source junk as there is closed source.

Windows has always been behind the curve in terms of stability and security. It was a big selling point of OS/2, which really was a better, more stable and more secure version of Windows. Do you know why a large number bank teller ATM machines run OS/2 rather than Windows? Think about that. Its not because it makes the ATM cheaper to run and install...

When the Intel processors first got protection mode Microsoft did a lazy man's approach to taking advantage of what the processor had to offer. As just one example all open applications shared a common local descriptor table. Here is this nice protection mechanism that the hardware gives you by letting each process have its own, protected LDT. But M$ says "nah, too hard, we'll just have one". Well, really bad idea if you want a stable, secure operating system.

In a prior version of Windows, M$ gave the user the ability to say that certain file types are trusted and can be automatically opened, whereas other types would require the OS ask first. Great idea, poor implementation. You could hide an executable with a .jpg extension, which were usually trusted files. But the code in the OS that recognizes file type would inspect the file and determine "that's not a JPG, that's an executable" and then open anyway. Lovely huh? On Mac OS-X if a program downloads, through my browser for example, the OS requires that I either be logged in as root or have the root password before it will allow the program to launch. That's a big step to being secure.

Dude, quit dreaming that Windows is not a piece of crap.

mercphoto

Shay Stephens wrote:

Why do you keep bringing up windows and OS's??? I am trying to talk about users and their mentality, the kind that goes "I'm immune, clickety clickety click...oh nooooooo!"

Valid point. I guess I fixated on your comment about nut-jobs.

Bob Bell

mercphoto wrote:

Valid point. I guess I fixated on your comment about nut-jobs.

No one would read this if it said all of you unsavy computer people. Although I guess FREE CANON L GLASS would attact attention too lol

mercphoto

Bob Bell wrote:

Although I guess FREE CANON L GLASS would attact attention too lol

WHERE ??? !!!!

ChrisJ

rsinmadrid wrote:

If aliens from the planet Zork abducted your computer...

It is pitch black, you are likely to be eaten by a grue.

gus

Shay Stephens wrote:

If nothing else, please, for me, make a backup of your important can't-live-without data, today!

I dont have any important can't-live-without data...thats the great bit about using your computer as a toy. I format the HD ...load all my disc's back in & off i go again into another brick wall....I format the HD...

Man these things are great if you dont take 'em too seriously.