A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

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.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Windows Defender Offline



 
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #16  
Old January 8th 12, 05:23 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
Alias[_67_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 65
Default Windows Defender Offline

On 01/08/2012 05:07 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
On 1/8/2012 8:53 AM, Alias wrote:
On 01/08/2012 03:36 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
On 1/8/2012 5:13 AM, BillW50 wrote:
In , philo wrote:
All well and good but in the case of root kits... what would lead
someone to suspect one is when their credit card or bank account
gets compromised... in other words *too late*

That's why I moved over to Linux 2+ years ago

You are a Linux user and don't know what Root means? That is where
the rootkit was originally created for. Hacking into Linux and Unix
machines. It just amazes me how many Linux users who knows nothing
about Linux malware. Most Linux users don't run AV software or
anything. And they could be totally infected with malware and still
be totally clueless.

I honestly didn't know that, so I went to Wikipedia and found this:

The term rootkit or root kit originally referred to a
maliciously-modified set of administrative tools for a Unix-like
operating system that granted "root" access. If an intruder could
replace the standard administrative tools on a system with a rootkit,
the intruder could obtain root access over the system whilst
simultaneously concealing these activities from the legitimate system
administrator. These first generation rootkits were trivial to detect
by using tools such as Tripwire that had not been compromised to
access the same information.

It amazes me how the most die-hard Linux user claims that they are
impervious to viruses. Though truth be know it's more likely that there
isn't much of an interest in targeting such a small demographic, and the
interest is in targeting the most common OS on PCs today. Now if things
were the other way and Linux was the most popular OS on PCs then we
would be hearing about viruses on them instead.



Thank you for regurgitating MS FUD. It's bull****.


In your opinion.... just think about it, if you were of a criminal mind
and wanted to write a malware program to acquire bank account numbers
and you had your choice of three OSs. OS #1 has a base of 1,500,000
users, OS #2 has 9,000,000 users, and OS #3 has 250,000,000 users.
Which one would you choose?

I would think #3, not because it may be easier to write malware for that
OS, but because it has far more users than the other OSs thus increasing
your chances of obtaining your goal.



That's fine and dandy but isn't the reason why Linux is bullet ****ing
proof compared to Windows. Nor does it explain why Windows 7 is more
secure than XP.

--
Alias
Ads
  #17  
Old January 8th 12, 05:46 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
BillW50
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,556
Default Windows Defender Offline

In ,
Alias wrote:
Devout Windows users like you believe the MS FUD. Windows 7 is more
secure than XP due to its UAC and other features but enjoys a large
market share. Oops.


What no references again? If you want some credibility, you need to have
some reliable references. Here let me help you.

Users distributed by the operating system that has been exposed to
malicious code.

58% Windows Vista/7
41% Windows XP
3% Windows 2003
2% Windows 2000
0% Windows 98

This is how Windows get infected with malware
http://net-security.org/malware_news.php?id=1863

Unless I am missing something here, this study seems to suggest that
Windows 98 and 2000 are the safest Windows versions so far. Probably
because modern malware can't even run on them would be my guess. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3


  #18  
Old January 8th 12, 11:05 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
Cheng Heng[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default Windows Defender Offline

BillW50 wrote:

You are a Linux user and don't know what Root means? That is where the
rootkit was originally created for. Hacking into Linux and Unix
machines. It just amazes me how many Linux users who knows nothing about
Linux malware. Most Linux users don't run AV software or anything. And
they could be totally infected with malware and still be totally
clueless.


Most Linux users are hobbyists and computer enthusiasts and so if their
system is infected, it does not matter at all.

Windows users are serious users who are using their systems to make a
living and so the system needs to be as secure as possible.



--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ---
  #19  
Old January 8th 12, 11:10 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
Cheng Heng[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default Windows Defender Offline

Alias wrote:
IOW, user stupidity and not the fault of Linux.



you can also say this to Windows user. It is user stupidity - not the
fault of windows for infected systems.

--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ---
  #20  
Old January 8th 12, 11:22 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
BillW50
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,556
Default Windows Defender Offline

In ,
Cheng Heng wrote:
BillW50 wrote:

You are a Linux user and don't know what Root means? That is where
the rootkit was originally created for. Hacking into Linux and Unix
machines. It just amazes me how many Linux users who knows nothing
about Linux malware. Most Linux users don't run AV software or
anything. And they could be totally infected with malware and still
be totally clueless.


Most Linux users are hobbyists and computer enthusiasts and so if
their system is infected, it does not matter at all.


I agree up to a point. But some also do online banking and other stuff
under Linux that would be very bad if a bad guy got a hold of.

Windows users are serious users who are using their systems to make a
living and so the system needs to be as secure as possible.


There is so much focus on Windows security that malware is having a hard
time getting through. Linux on the other hand is wide open since the
mass majority of them don't even think about security. That Gentoo's
repository is a good example as it had a Linux trojan go unnoticed for
about 7 months. In the Windows world, this would have been stopped
almost instantly.

Linux: Infected by Complacency
http://computingondemand.com/linux-i...y-complacency/

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3


  #21  
Old January 14th 12, 12:12 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general
Alias[_67_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 65
Default Windows Defender Offline

On 01/08/2012 11:10 PM, Cheng Heng wrote:
Alias wrote:
IOW, user stupidity and not the fault of Linux.



you can also say this to Windows user. It is user stupidity - not the
fault of windows for infected systems.

--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ---


Never heard of drive by malware?

--
Alias
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.