EPTApril 1st Conflicker Virus - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Kennelie
United States2296 Posts
| ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
| ||
|
LML
Germany1730 Posts
| ||
|
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
On April 01 2009 15:35 JinSol wrote: seems like the patch isn't working for me. i keep getting "does not apply to this system" or something when i'm sure i downloaded the right one. i downloaded the vista 64 bit one since i have it lol. eh w/e, hope nothing happens haha +1 what if this patch is actually the virus from the m$ site O.O | ||
|
ghermination
United States2851 Posts
| ||
|
DwmC_Foefen
Belgium2186 Posts
| ||
|
Typho0n
Canada276 Posts
| ||
|
kAra
Germany1302 Posts
| ||
|
0xDEADBEEF
Germany1235 Posts
On April 01 2009 18:30 besseriym wrote: LOL... Threads like this always make me laugh, because you get to see how little people actually know about computers and viruses  My 2 cents: Anyone that uses Windows (any form of Windows!) is ALWAYS at risk of getting a virus. The sad fact of the matter is, Microsoft refuses to remedy the "less than satisfactory" method in which they handle file and system permissions. This means that NO MATTER WHAT you do to protect your Windows machine from viruses, you are still at risk. There is absolutely NO way around this fact. People will tell you that anti-virus software will protect you from viruses, but that's simply not true. They WILL do a decent job of catching MOST of the popular viruses and malware, but unfortunately it's IMPOSSIBLE to stop all (or even a good portion) of viruses from infecting any given system. This is a proven fact (i have personally tested this theory with several custom made viruses, some of which are STILL not detected by the leading anti-virus software.) That being said, this is not meant to scare anyone or to bash Windows (although honestly, even a child can make a virus for Windows...what's wrong with that picture?), but to inform you that you are always at risk of being infected, so why worry about it now? In fact, Microsoft themselves have actually unknowingly released malicious software via the Official Windows Update tool (if anyone remembers the Blaster worm.) So basically, there's no point in worrying about some new virus that is "glorified" in the media because it's a simple case of scaring the public. I would recommend staying AWAY from those "virus scanners" and "registry cleaners" and all of the ridiculous things that you think will help you find and remove a virus, because more often than not, they WILL mess your computer up! As long as you have a decent anti-virus software and you avoid web sites that are "questionable", then you are already doing everything you can to prevent an infection. As sad as it is, with Windows, getting a virus is a game of Russian Roulette :\ Chances are it WILL happen to you at least once and some people will never even know they're infected  If you're honestly that worried about a virus, be sure to BACK UP any important data you have on your computer so that if you do get infected and it does take down your system, at least you can save your personal files. OR you can use a better Operating System, like any one of the Linux distrobutions, although you won't be able to use the majority of your windows programs on it :\ You seem stuck in the late 90s or early 00s. Windows has really improved a lot in security in the last few years. In fact, it seems like Windows is now a tough nut to crack, and OS X is the most vulnerable OS. I've heard that OS X has some default settings which are rather questionable from a security standpoint, and (most importantly) OS X was the easiest OS to crack at a recent hacking convention called Pwn2Own (http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/03/28/mac_hack/ - but you can also find the same news on many other sites. Fun fact as well: Chrome was the only uncrackable browser (apparently because its sandbox model improves its security a lot), all others were cracked (Firefox, IE, Safari, Opera)). Mozilla reacted extremely fast though and released the 3.0.8 upgrade which fixed the vulnerability. It also all fits well into the quote "Apple is the new Microsoft" -- Apple is repeating a lot of the same mistakes that made Microsoft the laughing stock of the '90s. For example only focus on usability and none on security, and of course a lot of vendor lock-in techniques. But MS apparently did its homework. Windows Vista (and maybe XP also since SP3) is now more secure than the latest version of OS X. | ||
|
besseriym
United States42 Posts
Now, Microsoft themselves have claimed that they're new Operating Systems are far more secure than previous models (which, considering their predecessors, isn't much of a task), but anyone with mediocre knowledge of system security can be a nightmare to a Windows user. Even kids who have next to ZERO knowledge about how computers work are able to make viruses and other similar files which can cause SERIOUS harm to your system. I'm not a fan of Macs either, but their OS is built better than Windows in regards to viruses and malware :\BUT since we're not talking about how easy the system is to "hack" and we're actually talking about viruses, I'm pretty sure that even someone who knows NOTHING about computers would agree that Windows is EASILY the most vulnerable OS to malware of any sort (viruses, spyware etc.) and has held that position for a long time. I'm not hating on Windows...I'm simply pointing out facts, and the fact is that if you use Windows you are very much vulnerable to a virus or similar malware. I personally use Linux as my primary OS, and run a Virtual Machine with Windows on it for when i need to use Windows applications. I have not and never will see a virus or spyware on this machine | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
I'm not hating on Windows...I'm simply pointing out facts, A lot of those 'facts' are unsubstantiated opinions. | ||
|
b3h47pte
United States1317 Posts
And you'll never see a virus for linux until (if) linux ever becomes the most popular OS and then i'll be using windows and laughing at you for having linux and having all your viruses. | ||
|
0xDEADBEEF
Germany1235 Posts
a) 90% use Windows -> 90% of viruses target Windows. Simple. b) The vast majority of (those) viruses aren't very interesting or dangerous, and if you're only slightly IT-savvy you will never fall victim to one of them. Anyone can write a virus but it'll be shitty and every virus scanner heuristics will detect it even without "knowing" the virus yet. It's an uncommon occasion when a brilliant virus/worm (such as Conficker) comes along, one which exploits dangerous holes in the operating system (remotely! I.e. doesn't necessarily rely on the user doing anything, such as executing a .exe... it'll just spread over the network, it'll infect you without you doing anything if you didn't install a patch or if there isn't even a patch available yet). On top of that, Conficker also tries hard to stay on the system and it has a smart updating mechanism. So... dangerous viruses/worms, like Conficker, exploit security holes. And that's why I mentioned security of the OS. If you still think that you are safe when not visiting shady sites and not opening shady .exe files or mail attachments from strangers, think again. It's not the 90s anymore. Your operating system, browser, or any other piece of fairly common software you use daily might enable a virus to slip into your system without you noticing it or doing anything. Which is why updates are extremely important, on any platform, with any software. In fact, the patch which would have prevented Conficker infestation already came out before the worm was spreading, in October 2008. But apparently people don't like updating, and companies are slow with deploying patches to all their machines, if they do it at all. So despite the patch being already available for quite some time (so much for Windows being an easy target, eh? In this case it was the users' fault, not the OS...) Conficker managed to build up a huge botnet. And when it comes to OS security, updates and reaction time of the developers, Windows is doing extremely well lately - almost as good as Linux probably. And OS X seems to be the loser. Not that I care about OS X being the loser, but the important point is that Windows ISN'T the loser anymore. And the Conficker infestation was absolutely not Windows' or MS' fault, because they patched the vulnerability already in advance. but it's still the easiest system to "hack" due to the sheer number of available vulnerabilities alone :\ Definitely not true anymore. | ||
|
aeroH
United States1034 Posts
On April 01 2009 23:13 da_head wrote: +1 what if this patch is actually the virus from the m$ site O.O +2 oh well. APRIL FOOLS! | ||
|
Racenilatr
United States2756 Posts
| ||
|
Raithed
China7078 Posts
| ||
|
besseriym
United States42 Posts
They are not my opinions, they are actually facts ;o If you honestly believe that there is another OS out there more susceptible to viruses than Windows, than you should really start reading :\ b3h47pte...you clearly have no clue what you're talking about The reason Linux doesn't have viruses has nothing to do with the fact that it is not the most popular OS, it has more to do with how the system handles permissions. And for the record, the reason Windows is the most widely used OS is because of the fact that the VAST majority of home computer users are completely computer illiterate and have NO idea that there is an alternative to Windows (or even what an Operating System is for that matter.) I'll go ahead and assume that you probably fall under that category as well Either way, I'm not gonna argue about which OS is better in a forum thread. If you really like Windows, then that's fantastic. Just watch out for all the malware lol. | ||
|
0xDEADBEEF
Germany1235 Posts
Tons of viruses are available for Windows, but most suck and you'll never be infected by one of them if you're not totally computer illiterate. Because of the points I mentioned above, I'd guess that Windows is less susceptible to viruses now than OS X. Because Windows has gotten very secure. If a virus spreads, it's most likely the fault of the user. Like with Conficker. So basically you're coming to the wrong conclusion. You only see that many viruses are available for Windows and so it must be somehow easy to get infected, or that it must be somehow less safe than other OSses. Which isn't true. Ok, the threat of so many viruses out there maybe shouldn't be underestimated, but still, Windows has become fairly secure so it's likely you'll never have virus problems if you're a somewhat competent user. Just like with the other OSses too. They just have the "advantage" of low popularity, meaning very few viruses in general. But my point pretty much is that if Linux, OS X and Windows had 33.3% market share each and we'd only count future viruses, then Windows would probably not be the easiest target (anymore). | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
It's lies! I refuse to believe I have a virus! :@ | ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
| ||
| ||
