«

There's some real experts on there, LOL

Invisible allegedly said:

> There's some real experts on there, LOL

I also heard MS's Terry <someone> talking to Claire Suranni (sp?) on NatRad
just after 9am.

She doesn't know much, but knew enough to get him to say clearly that only
Windows users on 2k/NT/XP users are affected by the w32.blaster worm.

He had initially referred to the scope as something vague, like 'all home
and business computers'. From a Windwos perspective that would be true -
and he does work for Microsoft, so could be forgiven for being
Windows-centric in his thinking....

Overall, a listener would have arrived at a fairly clear understanding of
the problem and how to address it.

Invisible wrote:
> There's some real experts on there, LOL

How come Microsoft have gone big on media coverage to get the message across
for this worm ?

The payload is a DOS on windowsupdate.com after Aug 15 ( source:
www.computerworld.co.nz).

And yet MS certianly haven't had a high profile for virus warnings for all
the other crap floating out there due to MS flaws.

Is the MS approach this time 'serious and informative' because they'll be
the target for once, as opposed to the thousands of home users who've been
infected with god knows what crap over the ages...

Curious observation. Wonder if the media will ask this question.

"Robert Mathews" <do_you_masturbate@too_much.com.org.qq> wrote in message
news:bhc05a$4g1$...
> Invisible wrote:
> > There's some real experts on there, LOL
>
> How come Microsoft have gone big on media coverage to get the message
across
> for this worm ?
>
> The payload is a DOS on windowsupdate.com after Aug 15 ( source:
> www.computerworld.co.nz).
>
> And yet MS certianly haven't had a high profile for virus warnings for all
> the other crap floating out there due to MS flaws.
>
> Is the MS approach this time 'serious and informative' because they'll be
> the target for once, as opposed to the thousands of home users who've been
> infected with god knows what crap over the ages...

Of course not. MS is DEFINATELY not the only target. This virus causes
lockups, error messages and system shutdowns. Not to mention that many
networks are flooded with connection attempts as the word trolls the net.
Plus, it leaves your computer wide open by allowing a remote CMD session on
port 4444.

Cheers,
Nicholas Sherlock

"Robert Mathews" <do_you_masturbate@too_much.com.org.qq> wrote in message
news:bhc05a$4g1$...
> Invisible wrote:
> > There's some real experts on there, LOL
>
> How come Microsoft have gone big on media coverage to get the message
across
> for this worm ?

Microsoft went out there proactively before the worm hit, to suggest to
people that their machines should be patched. That was almost 3 weeks ago.

> The payload is a DOS on windowsupdate.com after Aug 15 ( source:
> www.computerworld.co.nz).

How do you know that is the 'only' payload this worm drops on your machine?

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:46:22 +1200, "Nathan Mercer"
<nathan@4757979!!!SPAMSUCKS****mcs.co.nz> wrote:

>
>"Robert Mathews" <do_you_masturbate@too_much.com.org.qq> wrote in message
>news:bhc05a$4g1$...
>> Invisible wrote:
>> > There's some real experts on there, LOL
>>
>> How come Microsoft have gone big on media coverage to get the message
>across
>> for this worm ?
>
>Microsoft went out there proactively before the worm hit, to suggest to
>people that their machines should be patched. That was almost 3 weeks ago.
>
>> The payload is a DOS on windowsupdate.com after Aug 15 ( source:
>> www.computerworld.co.nz).
>
>How do you know that is the 'only' payload this worm drops on your machine?
>

Really? I hadn't heard of it until a couple of days ago, and I don't
think it was discussed in this newgroup.

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:01:20 +1200, art <> wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:46:22 +1200, "Nathan Mercer"
><nathan@4757979!!!SPAMSUCKS****mcs.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Robert Mathews" <do_you_masturbate@too_much.com.org.qq> wrote in message
>>news:bhc05a$4g1$...
>>> Invisible wrote:
>>> > There's some real experts on there, LOL
>>>
>>> How come Microsoft have gone big on media coverage to get the message
>>across
>>> for this worm ?
>>
>>Microsoft went out there proactively before the worm hit, to suggest to
>>people that their machines should be patched. That was almost 3 weeks ago.
>>
>>> The payload is a DOS on windowsupdate.com after Aug 15 ( source:
>>> www.computerworld.co.nz).
>>
>>How do you know that is the 'only' payload this worm drops on your machine?
>>
>
>Really? I hadn't heard of it until a couple of days ago, and I don't
>think it was discussed in this newgroup.



The Patch is dated 16 the July

In news:,
art <> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:48:03 +1200, Robert Mathews
> <> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:01:20 +1200, art <> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:46:22 +1200, "Nathan Mercer"
>>> <nathan@4757979!!!SPAMSUCKS****mcs.co.nz> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Robert Mathews" <do_you_masturbate@too_much.com.org.qq> wrote in
>>>> message news:bhc05a$4g1$...
>>>>> Invisible wrote:
>>>>>> There's some real experts on there, LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> How come Microsoft have gone big on media coverage to get the
>>>>> message across for this worm ?
>>>>
>>>> Microsoft went out there proactively before the worm hit, to
>>>> suggest to people that their machines should be patched. That was
>>>> almost 3 weeks ago.
>>>>
>>>>> The payload is a DOS on windowsupdate.com after Aug 15 ( source:
>>>>> www.computerworld.co.nz).
>>>>
>>>> How do you know that is the 'only' payload this worm drops on your
>>>> machine?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Really? I hadn't heard of it until a couple of days ago, and I don't
>>> think it was discussed in this newgroup.
>>
>>
>>
>> The Patch is dated 16 the July
>>
>
> I saw that, but it wasn't really publicised until today when the
> problems occurred on a big scale.

You mean, "publicised" as in like, the media?
Mate, if you're gonna wait until you read about it or hear it on the news...
Hope you're not in IT and if you are, glad I'm not one of your lusers...

--
Regards,

Matt B
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There are 10 types of people.
Those who get binary...
And those who don't.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> Microsoft went out there proactively before the worm hit, to suggest
> to people that their machines should be patched. That was almost 3
> weeks ago.

True. I had updated my machine when the firt warning came out, so no
problems for me.

However, this is the FIRST time Microsoft have actively pursued the media
for interviews and comments about a situation like this.

Either a worm, or virus, the point about users having problems and here's a
patch to fix it is the message sent by MS.

Where was Microsoft when Code Red, Melissa, blah blah blah virus's were
running around ?

Is it only because MS this time are the eventual target for the worm ?

> How do you know that is the 'only' payload this worm drops on your
> machine?

I'm relying on the media to inform me of this, which according to
Computerworld, stated this was the payload.

To put that into the correct perspective, I'm also relying on the Microsoft
patch on my Microsoft purchased product to prevent this from happening.

Nathan Mercer wrote:



>
> Does this information come from a trustworthy source? How can they truely
> know what has exactly happened to the machine in question that has been
> comprimised. Think about it this way: If you've been hacked with this worm,
> your PC isn't your PC anymore. You've been comprimised, with root
> administrator level access and a remote shell open to your machine. I would
> be fdisking, formatting and reinstalling. Then I know my PC is my PC again.
>
Until the next exploit.
How are you going to sell all of this fdisking formatting and
reinstalling to the punters that have been convinced that all they will
ever need is system restore and a recovery partition or disk and that
they will never be affected by the product activation features of XP
Or do you expect that they will just throw their PCs away and buy new ones.