__/ [ William Poaster ] on Thursday 01 June 2006 19:39 \__
> On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 16:53:52 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> __/ [ William Poaster ] on Thursday 01 June 2006 11:33 \__
>>
>>> On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 01:32:49 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>> | A woman from Greater Manchester has become a victim of an internet
>>>> | scam in which hackers hijack computer files and blackmail owners to
>>>> | get them back.
>>>> |
>>>> | The new phenomenon, known as Ransomware, means victims cannot access
>>>> | any of the files stored in their My Documents folder.
>>>> `----
>>>>
>>>>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/5034384.stm
>>>>
>>>> Windows: Insecure by design.
>>>> --Roy Culley
>>>
>>> It was on BBC "Northwest Tonight" last night (Wednesday). She clicked on
>>> a pop-up window which told her a virus was on her machine & she would
>>> get a free scan. At least the security expert that Gordon Burns
>>> interviewed, said it was "affecting the M$ Windows platform which quite
>>> a few of us have at home". He advised everyone using M$ Windows should
>>> have adware & spyware programs, as well as an up-to-date AV. At least he
>>> pointed out that it was M$ Windows that was affected, & not just
>>> "computers" which journalist often say.
>>
>> Well done, whoever he was and whatever his name is.
>
> Yes, & I wish I could recall his name & for whom he worked. :-/
> I was concentrating more on what he was saying, at the time.
>
>> A colleague of mine spoke to me just half an hour ago. He supervises an
>> MSc student at the moment and he struggles to get Java working on
>> Windows (wait, I'll get to the point!). I advised him to use SuSE as
>> most cluster machines are dual-boot anyway. To cut to the chase
>> (Hollywood speak), I then came to mention choice of platforms. It was
>> then that he pointed out that a virus had been spreading throughout the
>> entire department infecting many machines in the past week. I knew
>> nothing at all about it. Until I told him otherwise, he was sure that
>> viruses could spread to my Linux box as well. We are talking about a
>> 50-year-old who works with computers regularly, by the way... in an
>> academic setting... quite worrisome...
>
> It is, rather...
>
>> To carry on this discussion, he said that the IT department has spent _a
>> long_ time fighting that viruses (now I know what they are doing all day
>> long!). They even said that _hardware) will need to be replaced as a
>> consequence.
>
> Good heavens..
>
>> At the end, I had him quite keen to migrate to Linux, at some stage. I
>> would not put any energy into it, but at least he now considers it. I
>> also had him accept and nod to the fact that Linux will take over soon.
>> He said that much of the staff here uses it already, quite happily so.
>>
>> He listened to the show you mentioned last night and he also said that,
>> in the midst of this discussion, Macs and Linux workstations (he
>> pronounces it Lie-Nox, unlike Linus' pronunciation) were said not suffer
>> from the same issue. I wonder if he listen to the same reporter. We need
>> more of these. Not only in this context. _ALSO_ in the context of
>> botnets (zombies) and DDOS attacks; _ALSO_ in the context of spam.
>>
>> Allow me to import some bit of dicussion that tickled a nerve:
>>
>>
>> __/ [ William Poaster ] on Thursday 01 June 2006 13:51 \__
>>
>>> On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 13:18:33 +0100, RPH wrote:
>>>
>>>> William Poaster <wp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>>>> news:pan.2006.06.01.11.37.21.147517@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 11:38:35 +0100, RPH wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The more this kind of thing happens, the more people are going to
>>>>>>> be looking for secure alternatives. The MS-sponsored FUD (we've
>>>>>>> seen a lot of it here from the astroturfing crowd) is going to
>>>>>>> struggle to overcome problems as serious as this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately I don't recall anything in the mainstream news reports
>>>>>> yesterday that made it clear that this incident was down to
>>>>>> deficiencies in Windows, all you got mentioned is 'computer virus'.
>>>>>
>>>>> See:-
>>>>> Message-ID: <pan.2006.06.01.10.33.45.921315@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>) Date:
>>>>> Thu, 01 Jun 2006 11:33:46 +0100
>>>>
>>>> I did read that after I posted, but certainly on PM on Radio 4 I
>>>> didn't hear any mention of Windows (mind you I was preparing dinner so
>>>> probably wasn't listening that closely) and I don't recall anything
>>>> other than computer virus being mentioned on the national news. Kudos
>>>> to your BBC local news for pointing it out.
>>
>>
>> Indeed. Thanks for pointing it out. I nearly gave up on the BBC,
>> particularly for narrow-minded reporting. I believe that, on the other
>> hand, they were the first deliverers of a paragraph stating that Windows
>> is popular among botnets. The paragraph was embedded near the end of a
>> long article though.
>
> I did pass a message to the BBC about what was said on their 6:30
> northwest news, & surely their website item (the URL you posted) should
> mention that it only affects the Windows platform. I see nothing's changed
> so far...
>
>>>>> FYI, 'computer virus' generally means windows, as few other platforms
>>>>> suffer from that crap.
>>>>
>>>> *I* know that and most people in here know that. The point is that Joe
>>>> Public probably doesn't, so it gets accepted as a general computer
>>>> risk rather than a Windows risk.
>>
>>
>> Right on! This remains a reality. SPAM and Web attacks are also assumed
>> to be just a 'computer thing' -- a certain innate nature is you like,
>> rather than a largely-Windows-attributed issue.
>
> Absolutely!
>
>>> Yes. IMHO it's sloppy journalism, just as 'crackers' have now become
>>> called 'hackers' by the popular press. The only thing on the BBC
>>> website that tells you it's M$ Windows is the reference to "My
>>> Documents" folder, but you'd have to know that's a M$ thing. None of my
>>> linux distros have that particular folder.
>>
>>
>> True indeed. I am participating in innocent hackers lists (e.g.
>> WordPress) and people get the wrong impression out of this. But why?
>> Hacker is not cracker. I just modify code. That's what Open Source is
>> about.
>
> Yes, the two things (hacker & cracker) are *entirely* different.
> Speaking of which, I note (in another group) that someone claims to have
> cracked the password. Just as a matter of interest, I wonder if changing
> the name from "My Documents" & "My Computer" to something else, would work?
>
>> They still prefer to portray this as rebellious communism. Let us
>> *not* forget that media is funded by many companies with interests. This
>> includes Fox News, CNN, and (MS)NBC. I had a long discussion about this
>> over lunch. The context was actually politics and pharmaceutical
>> companies.
>
> I see...
>
>>>> I try to educate the family in these matters, but their eyes glaze
>>>> over if you try to explain computer stuff to them. At least I've
>>>> managed to wean my in-laws from IE and OE to Firefox and Thunderbird.
>>>
>>> And that's the trouble, ignorance & apathy. IMO that's why M$ gets away
>>> with what it does.
>>
>>
>> It mustn't. That's the creed justifying my presence here. People must
>> speak out because mainstream media will rarely do it, unless pressured
>> to do so by its audience (readers, listeners, or whatever it may be).
>> When new facts get accepted, they are no longer a taboo and no longer
>> raise a brow.
>
> Agreed.
To clarify, I received both messages. I am assuming that your earlier post
did not appear on your side, so you reposted. I got both anyway...
Thanks for the feedback. Long posts often discourage that (Rex Ballard comes
to mind), but silence is far worse than a nod confirming that all text was
not entered in vain.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Data lacking semantics is currency in an island
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
9:05am up 35 days 15:37, 10 users, load average: 2.84, 2.95, 2.91
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project
|
|
