BBC Links Linux To MyDoom

Why I'm not surprised... by nametaken · 2004-02-04 20:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

That the BBC is being criticized worldwide for making unfounded claims.

Re:Why I'm not surprised... by jangell · 2004-02-04 20:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

Who gives a shit if a Linux user wrote it? If a Windows user wrote a virus to attack Linux the news articles wouldn't be saying "Microsoft Users are Evil. Attacking innocent Linux Users".. They would be.. "Linux is Inseccure and worthless" ..

If you don't want viruses to spread, don't have users running as adminstrators as default. Don't write worthless code.

Microsoft is just asking for it, as is SCO.
Re:Why I'm not surprised... by zurab · 2004-02-04 22:01 · Score: 5, Insightful

Unfounded claim my ass. Slashdot has a field day every time there's a juicy update for SCO.

A little bit of reality check here: you are comparing /. comments to a BBC article and expect them to follow the same journalistic integrity? /. is a discussion board; it's NOT journalism, it's NOT news reporting or anything similar. BBC is a respected news source with top-notch journalists that many organizations and people around the world follow and listen to. They have a much higher standard to follow in their news reporting; like checking important obvious publicly available facts before publishing something that stupid.

Now you've got the media turning its guns against you. Well gee. It was worth it to get that +5 Funny, mmm?

Next, maybe BBC should check out *.advocacy.* newsgroups - it could have a lot of guns to turn in a lot of different directions. The BBC article in question qualifies for one of those groups anyway - I just didn't know BBC lowered its bar to the standard (or lack thereof) of online discussion boards.
Re:Why I'm not surprised... by cozziewozzie · 2004-02-04 22:58 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's the slant that big media houses put on the stories. That's why you always hear about Muslim terrorists and Islamic extremists, and not about Christian, scientologist, Jewish, or any other type (although they certainly exist).

That's why you hear about Linux communists, Linux hackers (crackers) and Linux virus writers. If they use Microsoft, then it's something else that made them do it. If they use Linux -- why, of course, Linux made them do it.

They got it wrong by Mork29 · 2004-02-04 20:32 · Score: 5, Insightful

who believe that code should be free to all

We just believe that GPL code should STAY free for all like it was when it was published under the GPL. I know such an idea could come only from a zealot... but hey....

Re:Complain by welshwaterloo · 2004-02-04 21:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

sent this:

Hi

This is in relation to the story "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty."

The is telling people who read the Business section that:

"run-of-the-mill geeks" are "wreak[ing] damage on the unsuspecting computer user."

There is no evidence that this has been coded by 'geeks', Linux or otherwise. Most reputable IT news sources are agreed that the main aim of the virus is to install a 'backdoor' to allow spam to be sent through the PC. This means the virus is *much* more likely to have been written by (or partly sponsered by) organized crime.

It's not mentioned once in the article that the virus opens a back door to allow the PC to be remotely controlled. Is this perhaps because it doesn't fit in with the way the article was crafted..?

"in the case of the MyDoom computer worm, the motivation seems clearer. It has attacked a company based in Utah called SCO, bringing down its website with a barrage of emails sent from countless computers" Good lord - if you're going to do a tech story, get a techie to read over the damn thing before you hit 'send'. The attack was *not* carried out using emails. How would you address an email to a website? It was a DDOS attack. Two words - Goo gle. Is is a silly point? Perhaps but when the BBC is writing about computer viruses I tend to expect them to do the tiniest bit of research.

I use Linux, and I think it's aims are noble. I am insulted that this lazy article tars Linux users with these baseless insinuations I ask that you withdraw the article and/or print a retraction.

Re:Complain by Rico_za · 2004-02-04 21:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

My feedback to the BBC:

I'm not a Linux zealot, I don't even use Linux, but I have been following the SCO vs. Linux story for a while now. The article "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty" is far below the high journalistic standards the BBC have set in the past. It contains nothing but bad conclusions without any basis in fact. The fact of the matter is that most computer security experts think exactly the opposite of what is stated in the article: That the MyDoom virus was written by email spammers testing out virus technology to use in future spamming. It is very convenient for the virus writer that the Linux community is blamed for the virus. Simple research on the internet reveals many sources backing this (http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/0104 /28worm.html and http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/ 2376200).

Please don't let the high quality of factual reporting by the BBC revert to tabloid sensationalism.

USE THE FEEDBACK FORM, LUKE!! by sniggly · 2004-02-04 22:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

If you don't like their reporting, use the feedback form:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/help/3281777.stm

"Linux cyber-battle turns nasty"

Is your reporter Stephen Evans aware that MyDoom is a virus that is perpetrated by MS Windows machines? Meaning the virus was written to run ON windows BY a windows programmer...

Could Mr. Evans please next time indicate where on earth he finds the factual evidence to support his amazing theory that mydoom is the "wrath of internet zealots who believe that code should be free to all", or are we now to believe the BBC supports baseless ranting against a group as diverse as those who support open source software? Couldn't it easily have been caused by disgruntled shareholders, maglignant ex employees or al quaeda for that matter?

Thank god you didn't have a luminary such as Mr. Evans sexing up Iraqi WMD stories.

--
Of those to whom much is given, much is required.

Re:USE THE FEEDBACK FORM, LUKE!! by bonkedproducer · 2004-02-05 02:26 · Score: 5, Insightful

Here's my little salvo I fired off this morning:

After reading the story "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty" by Stephen Evans today, I was shocked to see yet another respected media outlet so easily duped by reading the headlines, instead of investigating the facts of the story.

As you know the story regards the fastest spreading Internet worm in history, myDoom.a and its variants. A common misconception is that this virus's purpose is to create a distributed denial of service attack (DDoS)against SCO's web servers. While this is partially true, anyone who takes as much as 5 minutes to research the virus, will find that it is a mean, nasty wolf in less mean, less nasty wolf's clothing.

Let's do that little 5 minutes of research for you here Mr. Evans, since you couldn't be bothered to do so. First off, let's visit http://symantec.com. Symantec is the maker of Norton Anti-virus software, and my personal choice in anti-virus protection. I'll save you the clicking on the links and provide you with a direct link to my source here:

http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc /data/w32.mydoom.a@mm.html

Now, let's see exactly what the myDoom virus does. This will take the vast amount of research time and effort of reading three paragraphs and one short sentence before jumping to conclusions.

QUOTE FROM SYMANTEC:
W32.Mydoom.A@mm (also known as W32.Novarg.A) is a mass-mailing worm that arrives as an attachment with the file extension .bat, .cmd, .exe, .pif, .scr, or .zip.

When a computer is infected, the worm sets up a backdoor into the system by opening TCP ports 3127 through 3198, which can potentially allow an attacker to connect to the computer and use it as a proxy to gain access to its network resources.

In addition, the backdoor can download and execute arbitrary files.

There is a 25% chance that a computer infected by the worm will perform a Denial of Service (DoS) on February 1, 2004 starting at 16:09:18 UTC, which is also the same as 08:09:18 PST, based on the machine's local system date/time. If the worm does start the DoS attack, it will not mass mail itself. It also has a trigger date to stop spreading/DoS-attacking on February 12, 2004. While the worm will stop on February 12, 2004, the backdoor component will continue to function after this date. - END QUOTE

Ok, first off, let's see what the real purpose is here, since you seem convinced that the purpose is to attack SCO. One in four infected machines will participate in a DDoS attack on SCO, and those that are infected and set to participate, will in fact cease spreading the virus to other computers (probably in an attempt to appear uninfected as anti-virus programs are updated.) But, that means that 75% of the infected machines will have a whole different purpose to their infection. One, to spread as far and as fast as possible, and Two, to make the machine what is commonly called a "zombie box" for the worm writers true intentions down the road. Both the 75% that do not participate in the DDoS and the 25% that do will be in the same boat after February 12, 2004. They will cease spreading, and attacking, yet will remain active "zombie boxes" for other uses.

Ok, let's give you some background, since obviously you don't, like me, deal with computer security and worms/viruses on a daily basis. The vast majority of computer worms in the past year or so have had the primary purpose not of destroying data, not of being destructive, but in spreading and creating a vast network of "zombie boxes" for the purpose of launching more and more unsolicited commercial e-mail, commonly known as SPAM. For an example, look at the rapidly spreading sobig and its variants.
Ref: http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-1020963.html?tag=nl

Something these worms/viruses have had in common is the fact that they

--
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence in society - M. Twain

My Complaint To The BBC... by pandrijeczko · 2004-02-04 23:08 · Score: 5, Insightful

Dear Sir Or Madam

As a license payer, I have always been happy that the BBC, to the best of its ability, maintains a high quality, unbiased news service.

However, as a Linux user, I am thoroughly appalled at the comments made by Stephen Evans in his article "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty" (URL below).

Mr Evans seems to imply that anyone who chooses to maintain his right to open Internet protocols and open data standards by using the free Linux operating system is, in fact, a malicious criminal.

While I accept that there are possibly a very small percentage of "cracker" activists within the Linux community who might be extreme enough to launch DDoS (Distributed Denial Of Service) attacks against SCO and Microsoft via the MyDoom virus, Mr Evans has demonstrated how little he knows about the topic he has chosen to discuss in his article.

Firstly, writing a virus is no easy task and an irresponsible programmer that chooses to create a new virus needs to have a very deep understanding of the inherent weaknesses in the application or operating system that the virus is intended to propagate through. Since the MyDoom virus spreads via Microsoft Windows & Outlook, it is therefore safe to assume that the creator is an expert Windows programmer.

Secondly, the Linux community is made of knowledgeable computer users who have chosen to use a free operating system rather than the majority choice, Microsoft Windows. Each member of the community has his/her own reasons for making this choice but, essentially, those reasons are encompassed in the following list:

1) Microsoft and other commercial vendors have quite clearly demonstrated support for a rental license model for their software such that, in future, their userbase will be forced to make regular payments to those vendors for continued use of their operating systems and applications.
The Open Source movement, which incorporates Linux as one of its "flagship" products (others being free Unix-type operating systems of the BSD family) believes that software can be created freely and handed out to the community to use and improve freely. This movement has grown despite Microsoft and continues to do so, thus demonstrating there is no need to wage some (non-existent) "war" against commercial software vendors.

2) Some commercial hardware and software vendors (including Intel and Microsoft) are keen to implement DRM (Digital Rights Management) technologies in their existing and future platforms. The purpose of DRM is to create hardware and operating system combination platforms that "decide" whether or not a particular application or piece of data can be run or used on that platform. These vendors have chosen to do this not for any concerns of security of their users but because this allows them to license this technology, at cost, to other vendors and their userbase while, at the same time, allowing them to cover up security weaknesses in their own products. The only people that will lose out with DRM are the users who will find that they no longer have the "fair use" of music CDs, DVDs and software that they previously enjoyed to create MP3s/MPEGs of CDs/DVDs they own for portable players, personal backups, etc.
The Linux community defends the right of any commercial enterprise to combat piracy and loss of revenue but not through DRM technologies that restrict the basic rights of all users, not just the criminals, from having fair use of products they legitimately own. Linux will never support DRM technology and Linux users can therefore guarantee themselves a future whereby they maintain responsibility for their dats, not some commercial enterprise.

3) Virus attacks via Microsoft Windows are reported in the media on a weekly basis yet I do not recall a Linux virus ever gaining media attention.
Whilst I would not define Linux as totally secure, the open source model and regular peer code review of open source applications means that security bugs are detected & fixed very quickly. Added to this tha

--
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.

Re:The page has changed. by Goldberg's+Pants · 2004-02-04 23:26 · Score: 5, Insightful

So now I guess the BBC have joined the ranks of CNN, Fox etc... Engaging in revisionist "news" reporting... Nasty...

Re:Pretty hilarious... by coastwalker · 2004-02-04 23:54 · Score: 5, Insightful

I dont know about the new york times, but the BBC has a world wide reputation for unbiased news reporting. The fact that both the Chairman and Chief Executive both resigned because of a couple of unverifiable sentances that turned out to be wrong uttered by Andrew Gilligan tends to suggest that they take this seriously. I can assure you that your jibe will be recognised as the result of small minded childishness by most readers.

--
Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.

12 of 1,194 comments (clear)