«

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...ewID=news_view

or

http://tinyurl.com/ku3u


--
Fris "AFO&U at 3:00 pm today for me" bee® MCNGP #13

http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help

http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/sobig_f.shtml

Apparently thwarted...


--
Fris "neener-neener-boo-boo" bee® MCNGP #13

http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:01:13 -0400, Frisbee® MCNGP wrote:

> http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...ewID=news_view
>
> or
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ku3u


Well if Microsoft would pull there head out of their ass and start making
secure software maybe there would not be this problem. Why the **** let
email attachments be executable? Why let any download me executable till
you make it that way. Windows is such a stupid operating system!

Then don't use it.


"Freeride" <> wrote in message
news. ..
> On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:01:13 -0400, Frisbee® MCNGP wrote:
>
> >
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...ntent=GENERIC&
newsId=20030822005114&headlineSearchConfigBO=10615 50000000%201061579847000%2
0%20groupByDate%20%201%200%201061550000000%20%20%2 0%20%20%20%20true%20true%2
0&newsLang=en&beanID=202776713&viewID=news_view
> >
> > or
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/ku3u
>
>
> Well if Microsoft would pull there head out of their ass and start making
> secure software maybe there would not be this problem. Why the **** let
> email attachments be executable? Why let any download me executable till
> you make it that way. Windows is such a stupid operating system!

On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 02:27:05 -0700, Freeride <>
wrote:

>On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:01:13 -0400, Frisbee® MCNGP wrote:
>
>> http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...ewID=news_view
>>
>> or
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/ku3u
>
>
>Well if Microsoft would pull there head out of their ass and start making
>secure software maybe there would not be this problem. Why the **** let
>email attachments be executable? Why let any download me executable till
>you make it that way. Windows is such a stupid operating system!

I suppose next you'll tell us Linux IS secure..

so your a member of the spanish royal family that does some consulting?

"A Real Consultant" <> wrote in message
news:%1L1b.236486$uu5.45554@sccrnsc04...
> Then don't use it.
>
>
> "Freeride" <> wrote in message
> news. ..
> > On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:01:13 -0400, Frisbee® MCNGP wrote:
> >
> > >
>
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...ntent=GENERIC&
>
newsId=20030822005114&headlineSearchConfigBO=10615 50000000%201061579847000%2
>
0%20groupByDate%20%201%200%201061550000000%20%20%2 0%20%20%20%20true%20true%2
> 0&newsLang=en&beanID=202776713&viewID=news_view
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > http://tinyurl.com/ku3u
> >
> >
> > Well if Microsoft would pull there head out of their ass and start
making
> > secure software maybe there would not be this problem. Why the **** let
> > email attachments be executable? Why let any download me executable till
> > you make it that way. Windows is such a stupid operating system!
>
>

the only reason that linux is secure is to do with critical mass.
once it reaches that mass and without commercial intervention it will be
more insecure than MS... that said MS does need to wake up and stop being so
arrogant



"|{evin" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 02:27:05 -0700, Freeride <>
> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:01:13 -0400, Frisbee® MCNGP wrote:
> >
> >>
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...ewID=news_view
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> http://tinyurl.com/ku3u
> >
> >
> >Well if Microsoft would pull there head out of their ass and start making
> >secure software maybe there would not be this problem. Why the **** let
> >email attachments be executable? Why let any download me executable till
> >you make it that way. Windows is such a stupid operating system!
>
> I suppose next you'll tell us Linux IS secure..
>

On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 19:22:54 +0100, "billyw" <> wrote:

>the only reason that linux is secure is to do with critical mass.
>once it reaches that mass and without commercial intervention it will be
>more insecure than MS... that said MS does need to wake up and stop being so
>arrogant
>
My point was that Linux *isn't* secure. Not out of the box, anyways.
*No* operating system (that's connected to a network) is. I've been
following some MS bashers that spout crap like "I'm switching to
Linux" in some of the MS security groups. If they can't manage
WindowsUpdate, I'd love to see them try to keep any other OS patched.

I agree Windows does have it's flaws, but who among us can write 100%
flawless code? And while it does have it's flaws, Microsoft provides
us with an easy way to get patched... WindowsUpdate can even do it
automagically for you! Granted, this applies mostly to home users...
I'd never randomly apply patches to my production servers.

I agree with you that linux will become a bigger target as the
userbase increases. No one OS will rule them all.. I use different
flavors of Linux.. I use different flavors of Windows... I use
AmigaOS.. I've even been known to use AIX, BSD, and MacOS (not by
choice)... the point is each has it's strengths and weaknesses... is a
boxed wrench better than an open-end one? Depends on the job you need
to do.

I feel better... really. I should pick a random post each day and
ramble.

Now... I need to either get back to debugging... or help the wife
houseclean. Suddenly reading over 3 reams of printed source code
doesn't seem so bad..

you look after the code i'll look after your missus.. after all with a hus
called kevin you probably needs a man]

"|{evin" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 19:22:54 +0100, "billyw" <> wrote:
>
> >the only reason that linux is secure is to do with critical mass.
> >once it reaches that mass and without commercial intervention it will be
> >more insecure than MS... that said MS does need to wake up and stop being
so
> >arrogant
> >
> My point was that Linux *isn't* secure. Not out of the box, anyways.
> *No* operating system (that's connected to a network) is. I've been
> following some MS bashers that spout crap like "I'm switching to
> Linux" in some of the MS security groups. If they can't manage
> WindowsUpdate, I'd love to see them try to keep any other OS patched.
>
> I agree Windows does have it's flaws, but who among us can write 100%
> flawless code? And while it does have it's flaws, Microsoft provides
> us with an easy way to get patched... WindowsUpdate can even do it
> automagically for you! Granted, this applies mostly to home users...
> I'd never randomly apply patches to my production servers.
>
> I agree with you that linux will become a bigger target as the
> userbase increases. No one OS will rule them all.. I use different
> flavors of Linux.. I use different flavors of Windows... I use
> AmigaOS.. I've even been known to use AIX, BSD, and MacOS (not by
> choice)... the point is each has it's strengths and weaknesses... is a
> boxed wrench better than an open-end one? Depends on the job you need
> to do.
>
> I feel better... really. I should pick a random post each day and
> ramble.
>
> Now... I need to either get back to debugging... or help the wife
> houseclean. Suddenly reading over 3 reams of printed source code
> doesn't seem so bad..
>
>

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 00:11:55 +0100, "billyw" <> wrote:

>you look after the code i'll look after your missus.. after all with a hus
>called kevin you probably needs a man]
>
Take her... please. Oh, the 4 kids and dog have to go with her. Maybe
I can get some work done before you realize the mistake you've made
and bring 'em all back.