Slashdot Mirror
Linux Worm Creating "Attack Network"
RomSteady writes "In what could be a case of the free pot calling the expensive kettle black, C|Net is reporting that a new Linux worm is "creating a rogue peer-to-peer network that has been used to attack other computers with a flood of data" and has already infected at least 3,500 servers. Seems it is true...the security of your web server depends on how effective you are at keeping up to date on patches, no matter if you are running Windows or Linux."
h0h0... censor this article!
I was patched in the minute after hearing about the security flaw. I used APT on my debian system to get the new version as it was already completed and distributable. I seem to remember code red running around for a good 2 weeks after I heard about it before anything was able to be done about it. Yup, that sure is a good comparison to make. So where can I get my pie?
reading slashdot over the years, the zealotry is of course high (im on slashdot, of course it is, and i understand that).
they have always been ravenous to attack ms and exault linux. well, its easy to cheer for the team when its doing well and everything is going pretty much to plan.
now you (the community) are faced with some of the problems that ms faces every day as the popular OS. will your solution be better than theirs, or will hundreds or thousands of the linux os go the way that windows does... to the screen of death?
ill tell you, your solution better be much better, but im going to guess that the people writing worms for linux might be a bit more into the scene than the windows virus writers are... and therefore a bit nastier.
will we hear the cheering stop and the work begin on a better solution? and no "people should know to patch" doesn't work. sadly, you are working with a population and real world corporate structures (not your personal single tower), so its just not feasible. hmm, we'll see what happens, but you might fail right about where ms does... at the part where the consumer must pick up the reigns.
There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
Windows by design is insecure, that is the difference.
Windows 2000 was supposed to fix that, and then we are now told its windows xp and is trustworthy computing.