begin risky.vbs
<3499378.455PGGKeVr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> __/ [ Roy Culley ] on Saturday 18 November 2006 18:53 \__
>
>> begin risky.vbs
>> <u5kul2lt8ruqchmdgbqu89oa46i8cg3a02@xxxxxxx>,
>> Doug Mentohl <doug_mentohl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>> " the new spam is sent as an image due to which this technique
>>> cannot be used and computer security experts are struggling to cope
>>> with it, reported the online edition of New Scientist"
>>>
>>> http://www.zdnetindia.com/news/communication/stories/161292.html
>>
>> Didn't Gates say spam would be eradicated in a couple of years?
>>
>> Wasn't that more than a couple of years ago?
>>
>> Does Gates know anything about technology far less how the Internet
>> works?
>>
>> Why does the majority of SPAM originate from Windows PC's?
>>
>> What is the solution?
>>
>> Should all Windows PC's be blocked from having Internet access?
>>
>> A Draconian solution but does anyone have a better one?
>
> Gates makes many predictions. He is full of it. But he's like many
> of these liars (or analysts) from Wall Streets. If they get
> something right they struct like a cock; otherwise they go hide
> under a rock and pretend they never said anything (or retire like
> Gates).
You've just described Funkenbusch and his posts to COLA. Time for
Erik to retire me thinks.
--
Security is one of those funny things. You can talk about being "more"
secure, but there's no such thing. A vulnerability is a vulnerability, and
even one makes you just as insecure as anyone else. Security is a binary
condition, either you are or you aren't. - Funkenbusch 1 Oct 2006
|
|