Slashdot Mirror
Linux and the Smile.D Virus keeps us Smiling
pstreck writes "News Forge is running a humor filled satire on the the recent Smile.D cross platform virus. It's a good read and just another reminder of why that other operating system needs to figure out a new security policy."
That's "more advanced" in the sense of "so complicated no one can really be bothered to figure it out and use it as intended". [Ambiguity intentional.]
Chill. What is so wrong with poking a little humor at Microsoft, Gates, and the millions that run Windows? They may have market share, but do they have a sense of humor?
We've seen a lot of it over the years from Microsoft and other major companies, but the people who once used to rally it no longer carry it on their news sites, but they actually have become a source of FUD as well.
OK. So this was posted as humor. But somehow it didn't read as humor. It read as an article that claims you need to spend money to prevent viruses on Windows while you could run a virus free linux system by just pumping an 80 IQ.
On Windows you're likely to get a virus from one of two places, either installing software or running software that allows scripts in it's data files.
Both of these are easy enough to defend against, however, it's seems like it's not in the best interest of the Linux community to let that be known. A little Fear, a little Uncertainty, a little Doubt is a much better weapon.
And when it's over, the truth is that had this been presented as a factual article on how simple it is to remain Virus Free on a Linux system, it wouldn't have even been read by many, nevermind submitted to Slashdot.
After all, FUD sells. It just doesn't make me proud to belong to the community selling it.
No Zen is good zen
Indeed, it hardly operates at all.
I for one would prefer if people would instead refer to it as 'the thing that shall not be named' as the title makes no assumptions, does not encroach on any several thousand year old technologies (I think that before the Romans put glass in them, windows were more of a hole in the wall than the true window experience they are now) and is dark and gloomy enough to reflect all those works forever lost by those forgetting to save every 10 minutes.
As to the virii, I wish Linux was as secure as all that, but as others have pointed out there are a fair number of exploitable suid-root programs with the average large distribution.
I had a read about HURD's security system a few months back and it looks a lot more promising than the traditional UNIX model (something about starting with no permisions and working your way up, rather than starting with all permisions and dropping them for your typical root service). It should be interesting to see if the new ideas work out in the long run, or whether the 30 year old security model will once again show that it got that old for a reason.
Since when twelve year old kids write on Newsforge? He says : "and I assume that once they've gotten the idea (from where I do not know) that Bill Gates deserves their money more than they do"
:) Just pathetic.
Where does he come from? I paid $300 for my monitor, does it mean that oh I shouldn't pay them, I better keep the money to myself?
As usual, when you can't beat MS, troll away
How many people do you know who habitually run their Linux systems as root?
Overall the article was good. I agree that now with StarOffice, Mozilla, Ximian, the nearly 2 click install from SuSE 8, etc. There really is no good reason to deal with all the Windows BS. Anyways, the one problem I had was that Roblimo was talking about the average Windows user. And I believe that the average Windows user would be a lot more likely to run things as root than learn how to use sudo. How many install instructions say:
Become root, then run: make install
Without people knowing what that means and why it can be bad, their systems are just as easy a target for viruses as Windows computers. Either way, it's an education thing.