If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
On 20/05/2017 16:19, David E. Ross wrote:
However, Micro$oft released a security update to Windows 10 to block WannaCry and WannaCrypt. To me, this indicates that Windows 10 was no less vulnerable than Windows 7. No matter what systems were actually attacked, much of the blame should be focused on the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA developed the tool used for ransomware and failed to secure its own computer systems against theft of that malware. The NSA therefore put United States -- people, businesses, organizations, and even the government itself -- at risk instead of protecting us. See my "The Great Computer Plague of 2017" at http://www.rossde.com/editorials/edtl_PCplague.html. Simple, on Windows 10 you are more or less forced to do your updates while on Windows 7 you're not, plus a lot of stupid people have stopped doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to force spyware and Windows 10 on them. -- Brian Gregory (in the UK). To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address. |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
On Mon, 22 May 2017 02:16:30 +0800 (SGT)
mail.m2n Anonymous wrote: In article burfordTjustice wrote: On Sat, 20 May 2017 08:29:47 -0500 Nobody wrote: From: Nobody Subject: Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7 Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 08:29:47 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0 Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.windows7.general,comp.os.linux.advocacy ,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt Organization: albasani.net So what? That's what your mom said when she coughed you out head first on a concrete floor. Very weak, Stay on the Porch... |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
On Sun, 21 May 2017 18:04:37 +0100 (BST)
Nathan Hale wrote: burfordTjustice wrote: On Sat, 20 May 2017 21:31:15 +0100 (BST) Nathan Hale wrote: Booford LOL grade school level..stay in school. It was an obvious parody of your ignorant, redneck behavior you moron. very weak, stay on the porch. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
Brian Gregory wrote:
On 20/05/2017 16:19, David E. Ross wrote: However, Micro$oft released a security update to Windows 10 to block WannaCry and WannaCrypt. To me, this indicates that Windows 10 was no less vulnerable than Windows 7. No matter what systems were actually attacked, much of the blame should be focused on the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA developed the tool used for ransomware and failed to secure its own computer systems against theft of that malware. The NSA therefore put United States -- people, businesses, organizations, and even the government itself -- at risk instead of protecting us. See my "The Great Computer Plague of 2017" at http://www.rossde.com/editorials/edtl_PCplague.html. Simple, on Windows 10 you are more or less forced to do your updates while on Windows 7 you're not, plus a lot of stupid people have stopped doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to force spyware and Windows 10 on them. CEIP was probably added a while back. CEIP *is* a good concept when it is between customers and developers. I think the subsystems in Mozilla Firefox, are an excellent example of an implementation. Microsoft CEIP on the other hand, drops all the info at Microsoft first, and the user never knows whether an actual developer logs into their Microsoft account and takes any advantage of CEIP-related info for their application. Whereas with Firefox, there is good visibility (Mozilla documents some of the things it is measuring). The lack of individually traceable documentation on Microsoft CEIP, is why people don't trust it. Firefox has tick boxes. Firefox has documentation. That's the right way to do it. "Don't **** off your customers." The annoying part in Windows Update, is adding software to make it possible to run Store Apps. When no one is interested. I don't have a problem with them offering any of that in the "Optional" section of Windows Update. I will object strenuously to the practice of putting unwanted payloads *inside* purported security updates. We want our security updates, to be little 500K nuggets that just fix stuff. We don't want 200MB trojans with a 500KB security update thrown in for good measure. I don't see that as tinhat-ism. So if I were to mention "**** you and your 200MB trojan", then maybe you'd understand. It's a violation of the concept they invented themselves, the "security" section and the "optional" section. I don't use the App Store on Win10. And how likely am I to spend hours going through that on my copy of Win7 ? Not damn likely. I can understand business interests and business plans. But, a company can take a light touch, and the high road when doing stuff. They don't have to be douche bags, all the time... Paul |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
Per Brian Gregory:
plus a lot of stupid people have stopped doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to force spyware and Windows 10 on them. My experience is that MS was, in fact, using updates to force Windows 10 on people. May have changed by now, but I almost burned myself a couple of times. Not a huge deal if once has images to go back to... but MS *was* using updates to push 10.... and my recollection was that they were getting flack for it. -- Pete Cresswell |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
On 5/22/2017 9:43 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Brian Gregory: plus a lot of stupid people have stopped doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to force spyware and Windows 10 on them. My experience is that MS was, in fact, using updates to force Windows 10 on people. May have changed by now, but I almost burned myself a couple of times. Not a huge deal if once has images to go back to... but MS *was* using updates to push 10.... and my recollection was that they were getting flack for it. Microsoft has a problem with buggy updates, which is another reason to avoid automatic installation. I turned off automatic updates. When I get an alert that updates are available, I wait at least a week while I monitor this newsgroup to see if anyone has an adverse result from installing the updates. I also review the descriptions of updates, even going to linked Web pages from the primary descriptive Web pages. More than once, I have avoided a serious problem by rejecting some updates. Of course, such a delay is not always sufficient. Since the end of 2014, I installed 39 Microsoft updates that replaced earlier updates that were found to contain bugs. Of those 39, three were replacements of earlier replacements of updates. And then there are the updates that fail to install, even after a second attempt. -- David E. Ross http://www.rossde.com Consider: * Most state mandate that drivers have liability insurance. * Employers are mandated to have worker's compensation insurance. * If you live in a flood zone, flood insurance is mandatory. * If your home has a mortgage, fire insurance is mandatory. Why then is mandatory health insurance so bad?? |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
In message , Paul
writes: [] measuring). The lack of individually traceable documentation on Microsoft CEIP, is why people don't trust it. Firefox has tick boxes. Firefox has documentation. That's the right way to do it. "Don't **** off your customers." [] Hmm. What's the definition of a "customer": someone who _has_ bought something from you, or someone who _might_ buy something from you again in the future? For Firefox, which is largely free (donations notwithstanding), the overlap is larger. For MS, it's basically a monopoly (certainly all high/main street stores, and the majority of online ones), so they know you _will_ be a customer whatever they do next time you need to buy a computer; whether ****ing you off in the meantime matters much, ... are you a "customer"? -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf For this star a "night on the tiles" means winning at Scrabble - Kathy Lette (on Kylie), RT 2014/1/11-17 |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Paul writes: [] measuring). The lack of individually traceable documentation on Microsoft CEIP, is why people don't trust it. Firefox has tick boxes. Firefox has documentation. That's the right way to do it. "Don't **** off your customers." [] Hmm. What's the definition of a "customer": someone who _has_ bought something from you, or someone who _might_ buy something from you again in the future? For Firefox, which is largely free (donations notwithstanding), the overlap is larger. For MS, it's basically a monopoly (certainly all high/main street stores, and the majority of online ones), so they know you _will_ be a customer whatever they do next time you need to buy a computer; whether ****ing you off in the meantime matters much, ... are you a "customer"? The customer is the consumer of your software. The person who downloaded it. The person who trusted you. Paul |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
On 22/05/2017 18:43, David E. Ross wrote:
On 5/22/2017 9:43 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote: Per Brian Gregory: plus a lot of stupid people have stopped doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to force spyware and Windows 10 on them. My experience is that MS was, in fact, using updates to force Windows 10 on people. May have changed by now, but I almost burned myself a couple of times. Not a huge deal if once has images to go back to... but MS *was* using updates to push 10.... and my recollection was that they were getting flack for it. Microsoft has a problem with buggy updates, which is another reason to avoid automatic installation. I turned off automatic updates. When I get an alert that updates are available, I wait at least a week while I monitor this newsgroup to see if anyone has an adverse result from installing the updates. I also review the descriptions of updates, even going to linked Web pages from the primary descriptive Web pages. More than once, I have avoided a serious problem by rejecting some updates. Of course, such a delay is not always sufficient. Since the end of 2014, I installed 39 Microsoft updates that replaced earlier updates that were found to contain bugs. Of those 39, three were replacements of earlier replacements of updates. And then there are the updates that fail to install, even after a second attempt. I never really had any problems myself. I install all updates including most optional ones unless there is a clear reason not to like with the update previews that have started to appear recently. As soon as I heard MS was pushing Windows 10 I ran Never10 and that's all I had to do to make sure I wasn't upgraded to Windows 10. I've never seen any real evidence that Microsoft stealing my data, I assume that some researcher somewhere would notice if they were and a big fuss would be made. I can only assume that people who have problems largely have them because they have chosen to ignore some weird semi random set of updates which happens to be a combination that Microsoft did not test for bugs. -- Brian Gregory (in the UK). To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
On 22/05/2017 13:10, Brian Gregory wrote:
On 20/05/2017 16:19, David E. Ross wrote: However, Micro$oft released a security update to Windows 10 to block WannaCry and WannaCrypt. To me, this indicates that Windows 10 was no less vulnerable than Windows 7. No matter what systems were actually attacked, much of the blame should be focused on the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA developed the tool used for ransomware and failed to secure its own computer systems against theft of that malware. The NSA therefore put United States -- people, businesses, organizations, and even the government itself -- at risk instead of protecting us. See my "The Great Computer Plague of 2017" at http://www.rossde.com/editorials/edtl_PCplague.html. Simple, on Windows 10 you are more or less forced to do your updates while on Windows 7 you're not, plus a lot of stupid people have stopped doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to force spyware and Windows 10 on them. Actually it seems that there was a bug in the XP version of the exploit (as implemented in WanaCry). -- Brian Gregory (in the UK). To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
On Mon, 22 May 2017 23:05:32 +0100, Brian Gregory
wrote: I never really had any problems myself. I install all updates including most optional ones So you were vulnerable from August 2016 - March 2017 to an exploit M$ knew about. Most XP machines are so hardened by firewalls and lack of PEBKACs that very few were affected. (only 1% of all victims) Carry on training. You WILL eventually hit your mouth with that ice cream. Meanwhile, wipe it off your nose graciously, don't make such a fuss. Sht happens. []'s -- Don't be evil - Google 2004 We have a new policy - Google 2012 |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
In message , Shadow
writes: On Mon, 22 May 2017 23:05:32 +0100, Brian Gregory wrote: I never really had any problems myself. I install all updates including most optional ones So you were vulnerable from August 2016 - March 2017 to an exploit M$ knew about. Most XP machines are so hardened by firewalls and lack of PEBKACs that very few were affected. (only 1% of all victims) Is that, 1% of all victims of WannaCry were XP users? How does that compare with the percentage of (*online*) computers that are running XP? (Figures claimed for that vary widely, of course.) Carry on training. You WILL eventually hit your mouth with that ice cream. Meanwhile, wipe it off your nose graciously, don't make such a fuss. Sht happens. []'s -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur". ("Anything is more impressive if you say it in Latin") |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
On 24/05/2017 13:41, Shadow wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2017 23:05:32 +0100, Brian Gregory wrote: I never really had any problems myself. I install all updates including most optional ones So you were vulnerable from August 2016 - March 2017 to an exploit M$ knew about. Most XP machines are so hardened by firewalls and lack of PEBKACs that very few were affected. (only 1% of all victims) Carry on training. You WILL eventually hit your mouth with that ice cream. Meanwhile, wipe it off your nose graciously, don't make such a fuss. Sht happens. []'s Actually it seems that there was a bug in the XP version of the eternal Blue exploit (as implemented in WanaCry, don't know about in the stolen NSA document). I wonder if the NSA leaned on Microsoft? Probably not, but it wouldn't really surprise me if they did, maybe that's why the patches were delayed from February to March. -- Brian Gregory (in the UK). To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
On Sun, 21 May 2017 14:06:40 -0700, tesla sTinker
wrote: Ransom ware is mal ware, same ****. the way this company programmed its malware remover, is that if its not of the op system files, it checks it, and marks it. So its like, say goodbye to malware if your using it... It will locate several of them first time you run it. And it matters not, if you have run malware removers before. And what is amazing, is this thing is only 2mb in size. Would not be caught dead without it... Malware Remover Or many of his other good small softwares that are free. http://www.novirusthanks.org/free-tools/ Since you keep promoting that site, I wonder whether you have a connection to it in some way. Is it your site? Just curious. -- Char Jackson |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|