Microsoft urges joint action on cybercrime

Microsoft cause of cybercrime.

In other news: 90% of all zombie hosts run Microsoft Windows.
 
Which ironically is inline with the OS demographic. Wow that means Linux based OS has the same security problems windows ones do. Wait till it becomes viable to write viruses for Linux based system. Maybe then the fanboys will take their blinkers off and realise every system is suseptible to attacks.
 
What is their problem? Microsoft wants to fight everything!

Viruses coming out is a good thing in a way, it gives people jobs (like anti virus places)

Computer viruses are just like the HIV virus, if you keep your defs up to date and don't download things you don't know anything about, you'll be fine!

People who get viruses are normally n00bs who just need to learn how to combat them.
 
Which ironically is inline with the OS demographic. Wow that means Linux based OS has the same security problems windows ones do. Wait till it becomes viable to write viruses for Linux based system. Maybe then the fanboys will take their blinkers off and realise every system is suseptible to attacks.

I do think all the fan boys know their system is also vulnerable. The only difference is if something goes wrong with Windows you must normally wait for Microsoft and if something goes wrong with Linux... you can fix it yourself :D or wait for one of the other thousand developers out there to fix it.

Nice but old read on the subject is Linux vs. Windows Viruses.

Regards,
 
I do think all the fan boys know their system is also vulnerable. The only difference is if something goes wrong with Windows you must normally wait for Microsoft and if something goes wrong with Linux... you can fix it yourself :D or wait for one of the other thousand developers out there to fix it.

Nice but old read on the subject is Linux vs. Windows Viruses.

Regards,

Sorry, I had a lot of time on my hands so it's going to be a big post...

Thats the ideal scenario, but lets be honest in practice... common. Your average end user (which is whome they are gearing Linux for) doesnt know (or wants to know) how to code a fix, nor how to track down help for a fix. Even worse, are even aware that there is a problem. Also, being a developer, I know the chaos that can ensue when someone is allowed to modify code without controls in place. It is a recipe for disater. Frankly I like the fact that MS with all there highly paid gaurenteed top shelf developers who all have a fundamental understanding of the system and have strict procedures and change controls in place, are working on my fix. I dont want some code monkey wannabe working on fixes for my PC, cause I assure you it they will introduce more flaws.

As far as security, I read an article where a hacker was given an windows box an a Linux one, the Linux one was more secure... by 0.25 of a second. You only need to know the exploit.
I will try dig it up, but it was a while ago.

Which kinda makes my point, that every system has flaws, and the average Linux and Mac users philosophy thinking theirs are infallable is going to be to their detrement in the long run, especially when the system gain momentum.
Apple say they dont need to run antivirus cause there are no viruses for Macs is the most irresponsible, ignorant, dumbass statement I have ever heard of.

At the end of the day your average Linux and Mac fanboy seem to have to attack MS at every oppertunity they get, and in doing so are blind to the flaws in their own systems. At least with MS the problems are widely published and fixes trickle through faster than your average developer could push them out.

NOTE: Read your article. The guy kinda contridicts himself. Says outlook executes exe when you click em. Then says they fixed it, you cant recieve exe's, but it is still flawed cause you can get around this with a reg hack (like you average user knows how to do this) Then says Linux is safer cause you have to save the attatchement, grant permission, then execute....HANG ON... isnt the net result the same. The exe gets executed. He also forgets to mention one important fact... user friendliness, the the expert this is taboo, but in the real world things have to be VERY easy and basic. A concept like permissions for an end user is way beyond comprehension (as is a reg hack). Why do you think windows got momentum over Linux in the first place.... user friendliness. Both system were always there, infact Linux outdates windows if you want to get perdantic, however windows was adopted because of it's simplicity towards tasks.

Now you could argue that Linux is addressing this, etc. But in doing so, are aligning themselves much the same way MS did, and you will see the system becoming less secure as it becomes more user friendly. It is an equilibiam between security, friendliness and education, you cant have all. OS developers are in a bit of a quandry with this. Look at the XP to Vista transition. MS engineered it from the ground up again, and in making it more secure had to introduce user prompts for application execution, etc. Now everyone is all upset, that it is a pain, and invariably dont read the popups, or disable the mechanism alltogether. Now whos to blame, the dumb user who didnt read that "BIGVIRUS.EXE is trying to access the registry" or MS for even allowing any form of application to touch the registry....I say it is the ignorant user. LinApple fanboys will blame the OS, bearing in mind the same problem exists on all 3 OS.

Another thing where your article is flawed, is that it says Linux is more secure cause of its email clients are better than outlook....email client...thats not an operating system. What relevance do the applications I run on my PC have on the OS. Nothing. Thats like saying I wrote a malicous program, ran it on my PC and now windows is crap cause it crashed. The OS is a platform for applications to talk to hardware, and to protect it as much as prossible without taking away the functionality of the hardware, which is the very reason viruses exist. The OS is not allowed to dictate what an app can and cant do (Any dev worth his salt will tell you that) and to even suggest it is crazy.

The article rounds off by saying:
"So when you use Linux, you're not using a perfectly safe OS. There is no such thing. But Linux and Mac OS X establish a more secure footing than Microsoft Windows, one that makes it far harder for viruses to take hold in the first place, but if one does take hold, harder to damage the system, but if one succeeds in damaging the system, harder to spread to other machines and repeat the process."

Notice the word "harder", meaning there is a way, but it is not obvious, meaning, it is only a matter of time till the methods become common knowledge and practice in the virus world. Making something more difficult does not make the problem go away. MS has adopted this thinking (you dont see them saying, "ja well that hack is really difficult to pull off, so we wont bother fixing it), Linux and Mac seem to be still living in a false sense of security that this is enough.

At the end of the day a system only need one and only one exploit to be non secure, all that it takes then is for someone to utilise that exploit and by implication that Linux, OSX, Windows all have at least one exploit, I think you will agree that all are not safe and all are on equal footing.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad I've switched to Linux.
No more
1. virus checks.
2. memory upgrades to run that bloatware.
3. searching endlessly for help when you run into problems.
4. searching for drivers that may work and doesn't work most of the time.
5. typing in endless cd keys.
6. searching endlessly for programs to do a certion job for you.

Linux made life a lot simpler.
 
I'm glad I've switched to Linux.
No more
1. virus checks.
2. memory upgrades to run that bloatware.
3. searching endlessly for help when you run into problems.
4. searching for drivers that may work and doesn't work most of the time.
5. typing in endless cd keys.
6. searching endlessly for programs to do a certion job for you.

Linux made life a lot simpler.

Amen to that!

Especially the fiddling with keys and subsequent search for cracked keys on the Net... :D

You forgot to add WGA, activation and the thrills and spills that goes with it. :p :D
 
You know, other than option 1 on your list (and I addressed the narrow mindedness of this statment in my previous post) the other ones are a once off affair with respect to day to day computing. I have had my box running for 1.5 years now on an XP installation and havent had to bother with any of those. Lemme run through em.

1: Very naive viewpoint, but anyways...

2: Mem upgrades, I havent upgraded my modest 1 gig ram since I had my PC, no problems there.

3: This is trash, cause MS support and KB's are excellent, and I believe it is more difficult to track down help on a Linux problem cause every fanboy think he's an expert and you got an overflow of disinformation

4: And dont even start the drivers argument. You mean to tell me Linux has better drivere support than windows...gimme a break.

5: Average user types in 3 keys, MS office and OS, normally the OS is preinstalled so 1 key. If you fancy you might type one in for Visual studio or something. 3 keys... hardly an "endless" list.

6: Difference here is with Windows you search the NET, with Linux you search you PC cause it installs like 50 text editors, 4 compilers, and a ton of other crap to confuse the average user.. Whats more everytime MS ships software with its OS all the Linux kiddies scream and shout anti-comtetition.

7: Activation, this is hardly a burden. "Do you want to activate? Yes, or no!" If that is too much trouble for you then stop breathing cause that is probably too much effort too.

What pisses Linux boys off about Windows is that it is a commercial package, i.e.: You gotta pay for it. They have made piracy difficult on purpose, it is not sposed to be easy to steal.
 
Last edited:
Linux isn't easy as some say.Windoze is way easier and has way more support. Linux does have is place...
 
Back
Top