Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Another Reason to Embrace Linux (Flatty confused again)

begin  risky.vbs
	flatfish+++ <flatfish@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:27:38 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> The future of malware: Trojan horses
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | The stealthy attacks install keystroke-logging or screen-scraping
>> | software, and they are used for industrial espionage and other
>> | financially motivated crimes, experts said.
>> | 
>> | [...]
>> | 
>> | Most attacks include Office files that use yet-to-be-patched
>> | vulnerabilities in the Microsoft application to install malicious
>> | code on vulnerable systems. The software giant has patched many
>> | such flaws on recent Patch Tuesdays.
>> `----
>> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6125453.html
>> Such attacks are alleviated in Linux as patches flow in regularly
>> (without requiring prompts, reboots, or several weeks of unnerving
>> periods of waiting), users are not encouraged/forced to inherit
>> full system privileges, and Open Office is more secure.
> Lying again Roy?
> I don't see Linux mentioned in the above article nor do I see
> OpenOffice mentioned.

Where is the lie? Roy posts a link showing the inherent risks of using
MS SW with a subject suggesting people should switch to Linux! Your
comprehension skills are seriously lacking.

> You really are getting desperate aren't you Roy?

Roy is just posting his [News] articles as usual. If anyone is getting
desperate it is you and Erik. You both seem obsessed with Roy's posts.

The only thing I know for sure is that no matter how hard you, Erik
and the other trolls try to discredit Roy it is water off a ducks back
to him. You guys are just pissing in to the wind.

Desperate? Yes you are.

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

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index