Guest guest Posted September 26, 2001 Report Share Posted September 26, 2001 > Your last e-mail came to the list infected with a virus. Better run a viru= > s scan and disinfect! If you mean the last one Subject: Re: Crockpot where she tals about the juiciest lamb she has ever eaten... its clean. Red (Who has never EVER been caught by a virus with good reason)[0] [0] The good reason being I don't run any Microsoft software. Unix baby yeah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2001 Report Share Posted September 26, 2001 > I also assume your virus definitions are up to date; no more than 2 weeks = > old. The " Virus Protection " industry treats its customers as a cash cow. It is easy to stop all virii[0] in their track with 3 or 4 modifications to windows machines. The whole concept of detecting a virus by " Subject " or " string " (scanning the mail for known words) is flawed. Another, and perhaps more important point. When a virus gets into the wild the most damage is done in the first 48-72 hours. How many virus companies have: a, Released a patch for their virus software to detect and fix? b, Managed to distribute it to all their users. It is a conspiricy. I can prove it Red [0] I know thats not correct latin but so many people use it I'm going to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2001 Report Share Posted September 26, 2001 > I also assume your virus definitions are up to date; no more than 2 weeks = > old. The " Virus Protection " industry treats its customers as a cash cow. It is easy to stop all virii[0] in their track with 3 or 4 modifications to windows machines. The whole concept of detecting a virus by " Subject " or " string " (scanning the mail for known words) is flawed. Another, and perhaps more important point. When a virus gets into the wild the most damage is done in the first 48-72 hours. How many virus companies have: a, Released a patch for their virus software to detect and fix? b, Managed to distribute it to all their users. It is a conspiricy. I can prove it Red [0] I know thats not correct latin but so many people use it I'm going to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2001 Report Share Posted September 26, 2001 > I also assume your virus definitions are up to date; no more than 2 weeks = > old. The " Virus Protection " industry treats its customers as a cash cow. It is easy to stop all virii[0] in their track with 3 or 4 modifications to windows machines. The whole concept of detecting a virus by " Subject " or " string " (scanning the mail for known words) is flawed. Another, and perhaps more important point. When a virus gets into the wild the most damage is done in the first 48-72 hours. How many virus companies have: a, Released a patch for their virus software to detect and fix? b, Managed to distribute it to all their users. It is a conspiricy. I can prove it Red [0] I know thats not correct latin but so many people use it I'm going to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2001 Report Share Posted September 26, 2001 > I think President Bush's war on terrorism should extend to tracking down cy= > ber-virus creators. They should all be hoisted by their petards and swing = > in the breeze until death or old age, whichever comes first. Unfortunatly, it does. Bush's new law criminalises some of the work I do in the UK as a security consultant. Baby out with the bath water again. This is contraversial You'll think I'm joking but I promise you I'm not. I believe that virus writers are providing a public service by illustrating how insecure this software really is. Microsofts security record is absolutely abismal... there is no company with a worse record. It really bugs me when I hear " the Internet was crippled by .... " . No it isn't, the masses who have been given little choice and deserted by the manufacturer and being milked like a cash-cow by the industry are being blackmailed. All virus' could be stopped in a couple of weeks of development. The industry chooses not to. The reason I believe they are a public service is that the more annoying and embarrasing the epidemic becomes.. the sooner this will all be over. We have not seen a REAL virus yet, designed to cause mahem. Any mahem so far has been purely accidental. If you want mayhem, try this: i) Mail to all users in address book. 2) Scan and infect all IIS machines you can find. 3) Scan through Webbrowser cache looking for email address' (hmmm, anything@anything should do it). 4) Locate any accounting software on machine. 5) Add transaction to log to transfer current balance to a nice anonymous bank account.[0] Next time the user logs in to their bank using the " convenient " service, that transaction will go through. 6) Bleed anonymous account dry as the money comes in. There are countless ways that virii could be written. I am glad its not something I will ever have to deal with. Red [0] Who would be liable? Microsoft for writing Windows? The accounting software vendor? The EMail client vendor? The virus scanning company for not providing an instant fix? You for " not downloading " the fix in time? The answer once you read all the T/C's will be that no-one will admit liability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2001 Report Share Posted September 26, 2001 > I think President Bush's war on terrorism should extend to tracking down cy= > ber-virus creators. They should all be hoisted by their petards and swing = > in the breeze until death or old age, whichever comes first. Unfortunatly, it does. Bush's new law criminalises some of the work I do in the UK as a security consultant. Baby out with the bath water again. This is contraversial You'll think I'm joking but I promise you I'm not. I believe that virus writers are providing a public service by illustrating how insecure this software really is. Microsofts security record is absolutely abismal... there is no company with a worse record. It really bugs me when I hear " the Internet was crippled by .... " . No it isn't, the masses who have been given little choice and deserted by the manufacturer and being milked like a cash-cow by the industry are being blackmailed. All virus' could be stopped in a couple of weeks of development. The industry chooses not to. The reason I believe they are a public service is that the more annoying and embarrasing the epidemic becomes.. the sooner this will all be over. We have not seen a REAL virus yet, designed to cause mahem. Any mahem so far has been purely accidental. If you want mayhem, try this: i) Mail to all users in address book. 2) Scan and infect all IIS machines you can find. 3) Scan through Webbrowser cache looking for email address' (hmmm, anything@anything should do it). 4) Locate any accounting software on machine. 5) Add transaction to log to transfer current balance to a nice anonymous bank account.[0] Next time the user logs in to their bank using the " convenient " service, that transaction will go through. 6) Bleed anonymous account dry as the money comes in. There are countless ways that virii could be written. I am glad its not something I will ever have to deal with. Red [0] Who would be liable? Microsoft for writing Windows? The accounting software vendor? The EMail client vendor? The virus scanning company for not providing an instant fix? You for " not downloading " the fix in time? The answer once you read all the T/C's will be that no-one will admit liability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 My virus software picked it up as it was downloaded from the server. Software should pick it up, even if you don't open the attachment [or the mail message, for that matter]. HJ ----- Original Message ----- I run my updates and my virus scans daily. I also have my Norton program set to scan email as it comes in...... I've had no problem with Kim's in part because even though I do the scan daily I don't always open attachments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 My virus software picked it up as it was downloaded from the server. Software should pick it up, even if you don't open the attachment [or the mail message, for that matter]. HJ ----- Original Message ----- I run my updates and my virus scans daily. I also have my Norton program set to scan email as it comes in...... I've had no problem with Kim's in part because even though I do the scan daily I don't always open attachments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 My virus software picked it up as it was downloaded from the server. Software should pick it up, even if you don't open the attachment [or the mail message, for that matter]. HJ ----- Original Message ----- I run my updates and my virus scans daily. I also have my Norton program set to scan email as it comes in...... I've had no problem with Kim's in part because even though I do the scan daily I don't always open attachments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 It was in an attachment to Kim's posting yesterday; subject: Re: Re: Manufacture of Cells Dear The virus was W32.Magistr.39921 (AT) mm (DOT) It should be on your list of virus protection, as it has been around a while. If you do not accept attachments, you would not see it. If you are on digest, you would not see it. If you virus scan is not set to check e-mail, you will not see it., but you won't catch the virus unless you open the attachment. HJ ----- Original Message ----- this has me confused because I have virus software that is up to date and havent seen a response on any email, not that I am saying that it is not there mind you... just wondering what it is and all.... hoping that my software isnt giving me a false sense of security here since it didnt pick it up.... do you remember what this virus showed up as?? name wise?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 It was in an attachment to Kim's posting yesterday; subject: Re: Re: Manufacture of Cells Dear The virus was W32.Magistr.39921 (AT) mm (DOT) It should be on your list of virus protection, as it has been around a while. If you do not accept attachments, you would not see it. If you are on digest, you would not see it. If you virus scan is not set to check e-mail, you will not see it., but you won't catch the virus unless you open the attachment. HJ ----- Original Message ----- this has me confused because I have virus software that is up to date and havent seen a response on any email, not that I am saying that it is not there mind you... just wondering what it is and all.... hoping that my software isnt giving me a false sense of security here since it didnt pick it up.... do you remember what this virus showed up as?? name wise?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 I am on no mail. I read all the posts on the internet. That particular virus showed up through my virus scanner yesterday when I went into email. It had obviously come through someone elses address book ( possibly Kim's) As the sender was unknown to me, & my virus protection picked it up, I deleted it, then performed another scan for extra security. Maybe you should all go on web only. Tania -- In Atkins_Support_List@y..., " Brook6 " <brook6@v...> wrote: > It was in an attachment to Kim's posting yesterday; > subject: Re: Re: Manufacture of Cells Dear > > The virus was W32.Magistr.39921 (AT) mm (DOT) It should be on your list of virus protection, as it has been around a while. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 I am on no mail. I read all the posts on the internet. That particular virus showed up through my virus scanner yesterday when I went into email. It had obviously come through someone elses address book ( possibly Kim's) As the sender was unknown to me, & my virus protection picked it up, I deleted it, then performed another scan for extra security. Maybe you should all go on web only. Tania -- In Atkins_Support_List@y..., " Brook6 " <brook6@v...> wrote: > It was in an attachment to Kim's posting yesterday; > subject: Re: Re: Manufacture of Cells Dear > > The virus was W32.Magistr.39921 (AT) mm (DOT) It should be on your list of virus protection, as it has been around a while. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 If Kim has ever mailed you personally [vs the list], you may be in her address book. I sent her a personal message about the virus, and I got ANOTHER copy. I know it was not intentional, but that virus has a hold on her address book! HJ ----- Original Message ----- > That particular virus showed up through my virus scanner yesterday > when I went into email. > It had obviously come through someone elses address book ( possibly > Kim's) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 If Kim has ever mailed you personally [vs the list], you may be in her address book. I sent her a personal message about the virus, and I got ANOTHER copy. I know it was not intentional, but that virus has a hold on her address book! HJ ----- Original Message ----- > That particular virus showed up through my virus scanner yesterday > when I went into email. > It had obviously come through someone elses address book ( possibly > Kim's) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2001 Report Share Posted September 27, 2001 If Kim has ever mailed you personally [vs the list], you may be in her address book. I sent her a personal message about the virus, and I got ANOTHER copy. I know it was not intentional, but that virus has a hold on her address book! HJ ----- Original Message ----- > That particular virus showed up through my virus scanner yesterday > when I went into email. > It had obviously come through someone elses address book ( possibly > Kim's) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.