Slashdot Mirror
Viruses, Trojans And Worms -- Unplugged?
An Anonymous Coward writes: "This two-part article at Wireless NewsFactor examines the risks of malicious code on wireless platforms and what companies can do to combat potential threats. The gist of it is that wireless viruses/worms/trojans are unlikely to spread unchecked, and it digs pretty deep into why that is the case."
Why doesn't someone write an email virus that includes the alogirithm to decode DVDs? Then everyone would be breaking the law! Yeehaw! Breakin' the law!
Of once, with the ILUVU virus, we had a person re-infect their machine, becuase they downloaded the virus in their e-mail into their palm. When we cleaned the machine for her, she synced up her palm and put the e-mail back. The lady was stupid enough to click on it a second time.
=================
Unix is very user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are.
Also, many portable devices aren't easily programmed, and some cannot be programmed without physically modifying the device. Sure you can download a dev kit for your PDA, but not that many people know how to code for them. Cell phones are even harder to write code for. That means bugfixes and patches are going to be slow or non-existant, leaving them even more vulnerable to security exploits.
Finally, the userbase of most cellular phones and PDA's aren't exactly the most technically saavy people out there. Most users of these devices are ignorant yuppies who could care less about security issues of the WAP protocol vs. Bluetooth. These people don't care/don't know better. All they want to do is talk to their girlfriends/write a grocery list while they're driving home in their BMW or SUV. Most, if not all cell phone users are simply too ignorant to care about security.
Slashdot: Open Source, Closed Minds.
Come on, Timothy.. According to my book Requisite Puns for Journalistic Headlines, it clearly states that :
When writing a headline listing three items followed by an exclamation, the exclamation must always be "Oh, my". No exceptions.
Alex Bischoff
HTML/CSS coder for hire
Let's see when the clever media use these terms regarding wireless malware:
"air-borne virus"
"pegasus" (flying trojan, oh never mind)
"Quetzalcoatl" (you can figure it out)
More prosaic:
"wireless worm"
"Code Infrared"
in the very first paragraph. Anything that can be programmed can be programmed to do bad things. In my opinion, wireless opens up a new door. Since all devices must communicate over open air, they're easily sniffed. Just wait until someone figures out how to HIJACK a packet and trick the wireless device into thinking it's contacting a trusted host when in fact it's exchanging packets with a trojaned host. Then you open up a new attack angle. Suddenly you're downloading a spreadsheet to your PDA that's not a spreadsheet, it's an Excel macro virus.
IMHO this article is really arrogant. It's still a well known fact that unplugging your computer is the only true security, connecting it via wireless is opening up the channel even wider.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
Finally, they agree with me.
Send your friends messages of love at fuck-you.org
with the number of wireless devices using Sun's Java Micro, that's an interesting thought. I know at JavaOne last June the numbers were stagering, but I dont remember what they were specifically. All I remember were CEOs from Nokia and other big name wireless companies telling how they've embraced the j2me for their products. By having the j2me on all these devices, one virus could wipe them all out quickly, much like many windows-related worms.
But, as you say, that requires an 'in.' The J2ME inherits it's security model from the desktop version, hence wireless apps are essentially running in a sandbox that prevent and prohibit certain types of behavior, almost as if there's an anti-virus tool installed on the device.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Did you notice this spin?
Malicious code can replicate more easily when more hosts are available, so virus creators tend to focus on widely used platforms. (That is why few viruses exist for wireless platforms right now -- and why more viruses plague Windows platforms than Mac or Linux platforms.)
Obviously Windows' market penetration is the ONLY reason Unix/Linux platforms have essentially no viruses while Windows has so many it's spawned an ENTIRE INDUSTRY of virus-protection software. The organization and quality of the software and the number of people looking for and fixing bugs have absolutely NOTHING to do with it.
So if a lot of people abandoned Windows for Unix, Linux, or OSX virus writers would write viruses for them. Since only popularity matters, they'd succeed as easily with those other operating systems and app suites as they do now with Windows. So viruses would be just as much of a problem as they are now. So don't bother to switch.
Subtle, isn't it?
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I agree with this. While you've got some brain-dead design decisions on Windows (Outlook) Linux users aren't immune to viruses. Just because you use Linux doesn't mean you should go downloading and executing untrusted code or random files that are sent to you.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
Ahem.... WRONG!
Apache and Linux both have source available. Therefore, it should be MUCH easier to figure out how they work than IIS/Win2K. Apache/Linux is deployed across more web servers than IIS/Win2K. Therefore, more people should write viruses to the more popular program.
So then why is CodeRed (I,II,III,IV,etc.) for IIS/Win2k? Because IIS/Win2k is a funnier target. It's more fun to stick a thumb in Bill's eye than in Linus' eye.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon