Slashdot Mirror
Backdoor Malware Targets Apple iPad
An anonymous reader writes "Apple iPad users are being warned of an email-borne threat which could give hackers unauthorised access to the device. The threat arrives via an unsolicited email urging the recipient to download the latest version of iTunes as a prelude to updating their iPad software. Apart from opening up a backdoor, it also tries to read the keys and serial numbers of the software installed on the device, and logs the passwords to any webmail, IM or protected storage accounts."
This DOESN'T infect the iPad at all. It targets the idiots who bought an iPad but it is a WINDOWS virus.
See here for further details : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/26/ipad_backdoor/
Yes the headline is true, but it is certainly misleading.
Is it common for software to announce updates via email? Given that the device would presumably have a net connection, any legit updates ought to be pushed out through the iTunes store.
This does not actually affect the IPad but rather is an attack to get Windows users to install an "update" for ITunes. The "update" is malware for Windows and is targeted at people who own an IPad and sync it with Windows.
Great quote from the UK article: "Since buyers are likely to have a lot of disposable income and not much sense...." TFA is wrong - malware is aimed at the Winbloz boxen, by offering a download of a "new iTunes" program. Macs and iPads are not impacted.
Yes well, this virus is infecting a Windows PC, so much for that.
An e-mail, purporting to be from Apple, informs people that their iPad needs to be updated. Steps given for updating your iPad:
1) Download an iTunes update for Windows (itunes.exe) and install;
2) Connect your iPad to the Windows computer;
3) Select iPad in the iTunes sidebar;
4) Click “Check for update” then “Update” to finish updating your iPad’s software.
Note that there’s no legitimate reason that you’d ever need to connect the iPad to a second computer to update it. It has its own internet connection.
Needless to say, your Windows computer will be infected with the virus if you execute the itunes.exe that you were instructed to download and install. It appears that your iPad will be none the worse for having an idiot for an owner.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
I'm disappointed that there have been no Apple User/Backdoor jokes in this story yet. I'll check back in an hour. Don't kill my faith in /.
"I don't have to think. I only have to do it. The results are always perfect, but that's old news." - Meat Puppets
Note that there’s no legitimate reason that you’d ever need to connect the iPad to a second computer to update it. It has its own internet connection.
Now, I don't have an iPad, so I don't know how they're updated, but the iPhone and iPod touch, which also have their own internet connections, get software updates through iTunes, over USB.
This is how it's always been done.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
The target isn't the iPad, it's the windows box.
If you want to get really pedantic, the target isn't even the Windows box. It's the user's information and the profits that can be gleaned either directly or indirectly from aggregating such information from millions of such users.
I'm guessing that the rationale behind this is that people who snap up the iPad are trend-following sheep with more money than sense who are "easy marks" and thus more likely to fall for a "social engineering" attack such as this one.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
But, I do have a jailbroken iPhone. I guess there is a vulnerability with having a jailbroken device too. Basically, I'm trusting the developers who made this "patch" to be applied to my iPhone OS. They could have put *anything* in there: a backdoor, logging and transmitting my passwords, etc. Any time you modify your device with non-authentic software (non-Apple), you are taking a risk. And WHY would somebody trust a web-browser pop-up about upgrading their iTunes??? Only if you open iTunes and it says there's a new version available should you download it! hmmmmmm
Actually, all of the devices in the platform do allow app upgrades over their own connection. You *can* use iTunes and USB, but apps 10MB or you don't have carrier data you can upgrade them over wifi. The app store icon will even notify you when there are upgrades available.
Yes, for apps. Not for the OS itself, which is what was being talked about.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
With only about a million sold so far, it's not economically feasible to write viruses/trojans for ipads, yet. There are botnets that have grown larger than 1 million, and when you distribute something like this, you can't count on everyone getting infected. Once they sell 5 times more, I bet we will start seeing a few viruses that actually infect the ipad.
"But basically, I support the law http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1629374&cid=31995628" - by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday April 27, @02:40AM (#31995628)
I see your comment quoted above there Clone, as well as you signature Clone in your attempt to libel others here on slashdot. So, isn't Jeremy Reimer the guy who had parts of his website removed for libelling APK by his hosting provider and Reimer was caught email harassing APK by his ISP, Shaw of Canada, when Shaw put Reimer on a tracking ticket for it (which Reimer promptly ceased his email harassment of APK once he was aware of that happening), and arstechnica strangely no longer puts up articles by the blatantly unqualified Jeremy Reimer?
Jeremy Reimer and his friends Jay Little also had their websites removed entirely from CrystalTech.com and from petitiononline.com also, because of their making death threats to APK just because APK showed that Exchange Server stalls due to memory fragmentation are stopped when a memory optimization program is used (microsoft's own called clearmem.exe) after Jay Little, whom Jeremy Reimer brought in because Reimer doesn't even have a degree in CSC or CIS related fields (not even an A+ cert, much less an MCSE or the like to his credit, much less actual degrees) or years to decades of professional hands-on experience in the trenches doing computer work, failed in stating verbatim "I am an Exchange Expert" and when Jay Little saw what APK put up, he tried to harass APK by nitpicking his posts at NTCompatible.com also, where Little stalked APK there and failed on issues regarding ramdisks/ssd and also Windows own error codes/crash codes which got Jay Little kicked from NTCompatible.com as it did on Channel 9 at Microsoft also? Seems that was what happened at Windows IT Pro here http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/41095/the-memory-optimization-hoax.html which anyone can read.
So much for your libelling others Clone. You can't even get that right and you certainly like lies and libel, which are against the law in the USA and in other nations also.
Clone, I also note that you also called APK, the person you refer to in your signature here, a "spyware maker" http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31736454 , but he noted that Nir Sofer and Dr. Mark Russinovich have also had many of their wares classified falsely as spywares too, and that he took CA's 21 point test and his app did not violate a single point of their test and they downrated his app to "zero threat levels" because of this. APK also put up the very first guide to securing Windows back in 1998 which was highly rated at Neowin in 2001 and grew into the most viewed and most effective guide for securing Windows NT Operating Systems out there currently at 350,000 views strong and being made a sticky pinned thread, an essential guide, or being the most viewed and being usually rated 5 of 5 stars by readers of his security guide for Windows such as here http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=f94b12f3d43b3b9446bed90155910842&showtopic=2662 . At 350,000 views strong and with great feedback too, your calling him that shows you do anything but support the law, and regularly break it with libel on your part towards others clone.
Clone, You are a scumbag libelling little weasel clone, and now everyone will know how much so, after reading this reply. Just because you're a loser that doesn't have a job and because you've never done a thing in your life that's of service to others, doesn't give you the right to libel others who have, clone.
...does it blend ?
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Just like the iPhone right????
Whoops!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IPhone_sales_per_quarter.svg
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Mac OS X on a MacBook Air is running from flash memory, just like iPhone OS on an iPad. What exactly did you mean by "running from firmware"?
Note that there's no legitimate reason that you'd ever need to connect the iPad to a second computer to update it. It has its own internet connection.
Er, just like my iPhone? Which requires being connected to a second computer to update it?
Please help metamoderate.
I enjoy skulking here because the community is damn witty and I am often entertained and informed by what I read, but the editing of stories for any basis in fact has gone from inept to transparent troll-baiting and flame-generating. We all know some of the editors are idiots, but, come on Taco, I know you can do better.
This is a virus that targets Windows and somehow it provides proof that people who buy the iPad are "trend following sheep"?
In what way does this have anything to do with the iPad? the fact that it can be used to receive email?
Fucking morons.
What if someone wrote a virus that automatically jailbroke any apple device connected to iTunes and installed an alternate way of putting apps on the device?
The title of the article should read, "iPad owners take it in the backdoor!" haha
You have to download the trojan named itunes.exe and run it.
This is a "virus" now? What do you call stuff that spreads itself without user intervention... trojans?
How about autorun infections from USB keys... phishing?
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I guess its time to change that dirty pad. It was only a matter of time before someone tried to hack/infect the ipad on a grand scale, I'd like to see how Steve Jobs counters this....Introducing the iVagisil.
The attack vector is through the iPad in the same way a malware payload could be delivered through a Flash exploit.
I propose the name of the patch to cover this hole be named tamPod.
Either kdawson didn't feel like logging in to post this article as himself, or CmdrTaco isn't looking into stories. Too bad.
wth? AC nerd rage much? you felt the need to drag another thread into this one?
You left your terminal logged in and kdawson has been posting stories under your ID again.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
"But basically, I support the law http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1629374&cid=31995628" - by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday April 27, @02:40AM (#31995628)
I see your comment quoted above there Clone, as well as you signature Clone in your attempt to libel others here on slashdot. So, isn't Jeremy Reimer the guy who had parts of his website removed for libelling APK by his hosting provider and Reimer was caught email harassing APK by his ISP, Shaw of Canada, when Shaw put Reimer on a tracking ticket for it (which Reimer promptly ceased his email harassment of APK once he was aware of that happening), and arstechnica strangely no longer puts up articles by the blatantly unqualified Jeremy Reimer?
Jeremy Reimer and his friends Jay Little also had their websites removed entirely from CrystalTech.com and from petitiononline.com also, because of their making death threats to APK just because APK showed that Exchange Server stalls due to memory fragmentation are stopped when a memory optimization program is used (microsoft's own called clearmem.exe) after Jay Little, whom Jeremy Reimer brought in because Reimer doesn't even have a degree in CSC or CIS related fields (not even an A+ cert, much less an MCSE or the like to his credit, much less actual degrees) or years to decades of professional hands-on experience in the trenches doing computer work, failed in stating verbatim "I am an Exchange Expert" and when Jay Little saw what APK put up, he tried to harass APK by nitpicking his posts at NTCompatible.com also, where Little stalked APK there and failed on issues regarding ramdisks/ssd and also Windows own error codes/crash codes which got Jay Little kicked from NTCompatible.com as it did on Channel 9 at Microsoft also? Seems that was what happened at Windows IT Pro here http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/41095/the-memory-optimization-hoax.html which anyone can read.
So much for your libelling others Clone. You can't even get that right and you certainly like lies and libel, which are against the law in the USA and in other nations also.
Clone, I also note that you also called APK, the person you refer to in your signature here, a "spyware maker" http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31736454 , but he noted that Nir Sofer and Dr. Mark Russinovich have also had many of their wares classified falsely as spywares too, and that he took CA's 21 point test and his app did not violate a single point of their test and they downrated his app to "zero threat levels" because of this. APK also put up the very first guide to securing Windows back in 1998 which was highly rated at Neowin in 2001 and grew into the most viewed and most effective guide for securing Windows NT Operating Systems out there currently at 350,000 views strong and being made a sticky pinned thread, an essential guide, or being the most viewed and being usually rated 5 of 5 stars by readers of his security guide for Windows such as here http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=f94b12f3d43b3b9446bed90155910842&showtopic=2662 . At 350,000 views strong and with great feedback too, your calling him that shows you do anything but support the law, and regularly break it with libel on your part towards others clone.
Clone, You are a scumbag libelling little weasel clone, and now everyone will know how much so, after reading this reply. Just because you're a loser that doesn't have a job and because you've never done a thing in your life that's of service to others, doesn't give you the right to libel others who have, clone.
See subject above, and see how Clone tried to libel others here on this website via his signature and was proven wrong here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632188&cid=31999288 .
Clone53421 is nothing more than a little out of work bum who can't get a job because he wastes his life on slashdot here libelling others (which is why he won't get a job, because his kind do this rampantly, and this is why suits against them are not worth it - nothing to be had in suing a "ne'er do well" like Clone53421 is why).
Why is Clone libelling apk? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel.
Until Jobsy releases version 4, no virus is gonna run (in the background anyway).
Of course the iPod/iPad/iPhone is more secure ... you can't do fuck-all with it without permission from Apple headquarters ... and even then any virus must be written in Objective-C to conform to Steve's code "laws".
More to the point, the virus never TOUCHES the iPad, or even it;s files on the Windows machine. The iTunes trojan only affects AIM, Messenger, and other application software on the PC, and attempts to steal PC passwords, it;s only using the iPad in name as a method of social engineering, and its technically not even infecting iTunes!
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
I read what is written here and even checked out the urls posted, and it all checks out as straight as to what was said here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632810&cid=32001080 and here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632810&cid=32001124 as you attempted to libel someone here that's done more than you ever will in the art and science of computing. Why you did so to that ac apk was outrageous and seeing you shot down for it is very funny. All just because you were shown as being wrong on Firefox being not only slower than Opera, but also more security problem prone, only shows you are what was said of you, and that you are an online libelling scumbag.
Until Jobsy releases version 4, no virus is gonna run (in the background anyway).
Of course the iPod/iPad/iPhone is more secure ... you can't do fuck-all with it without permission from Apple headquarters ... and even then any virus must be written in Objective-C to conform to Steve's code "laws".
And so the myth continues. Because the iPhone/iPad is locked down then it must be secure. Thing is, it wasn't secure and it was because of that lock that people couldn't secure it. It was also the only smartphone that didn't get patched for it even though Apple had been warned for weeks before to patch it and it took 48 hours after it went public to patch. People complained, most didn't know why they had to restore their iPhones though because they didn't even need to touch anything. In the end, iPhone users were hacked and it was because of it being locked down. (If you had jail broken it, you could have prevented it from happening)
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
The vulnerable user demographic are *Windows users* of the iPad, not iPad users in general.
No, it's not. You're remedial reading classes start at 7pm tonight. Don't be late.
If I didn't have absolutely NOTHING to do, I wouldn't be here.
The malware installs modified firmware that opens up a backdoor on the iPad itself.
And the reason this backdoor exists is because iPad doesn't do OTA firmware updates. This can't happen on many Android or Symbian devices because those do OTA updates from a known server and don't require any desktop software at all.
Jesus H Christ. Take a pill. Right now you're doing more to undermine your reputation than anything anyone else has posted about you.
bah... Slashdot, wtf... and i was getting all happy and excited of virus targeting ipads.... well I hope this come true someday.... screw Jobs....
Note the removal of the word "more" by the parent poster. Of course the GP is right. The iPhone/iPod/iPad is most certainly more secure due to it's locked down nature. But that doesn't mean completely secure.
As to the example exploit, one SMS defect can cause a denial of service for 2 seconds per SMS. Given that SMSs have to be paid for, that's going to cost the attacker a lot of money. The other crashes the coms stack, such that the GSM connection is lost and can only be regained by rebooting the phone. Neither one can cause any permanent change to an iPhone of any sort. Nor can they be used to steal information. And a patch was issued within days of the vulnerability being discovered.
Thats the WORST case you can find. You can find far worse exploits for open systems. Which rather supports the GPs case.
Did you miss this part of your linked article?
"Meanwhile, a bug in the code written by HTC that controls the user interface on Windows Mobile devices could also be exploited via the SMS messages to make it so there are no buttons to push so the phone can't be used, said Miller.
For the attack to work, an attacker must send hundreds of SMS control messages, which are different from regular SMS messages, according to Miller. Only the initial SMS may be seen, he said.
The researchers will demonstrate the attack on an Android phone and an iPhone during their presentation on Thursday."
selling crappy, overpriced products to the fudgepacking, twinkie sucking fagots out there. Sounds very similar to the communist, twinkie sucking fagot RMS Titanic (AKA Richard Stallman)
GO AHEAD FUCKING FLAME AWAY
OR WASTE YOUR GODDAMNED
MOD POINTS FUCKTARDED SHITDOT SHEEPLE OR BETTER
YET GO SLIT YOUR FUCKING WRISTS
FUCKTARDED SHITDOT SHEEPLE
See subject line above, and realize you're not fooling anyone here clone. You blew it on FireFox and tried to libel someone that's actually done a few things of good note in this science of computing and now you have to eat some crow for your crap is all. Get over it, you had it coming you libellous fool.
See subject above. You're not fooling anyone with your alternate registered user account here clone53421. We know how that's done so you can mod yourself up with it and also defend your "clone53421" account using this one. Do you think you're fooling anyone clone?
See subject above, and see how Clone tried to libel others here on this website via his signature and was proven wrong here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632188&cid=31999288 .
Funny how that shut clone53421, eh?
Clone53421 is nothing more than a little out of work bum who can't get a job because he wastes his life on slashdot here libelling others (which is why he won't get a job, because his kind do this rampantly, and this is why suits against them are not worth it - nothing to be had in suing a "ne'er do well" like Clone53421 is why).
Why is Clone libelling apk? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
Still - They're ALL pretty good browsers though, but this "little tidbit" from a "hacker-cracker/security researcher" MAY "shed a bit of light on the subject" of which browser to use (Because Opera's the overall FASTEST currently & especially on the MOST USED OS PLATFORM THERE IS ON PCs/Servers in Windows, & consistently over time, @ HTML parse work, & again has re-seized its crown in Javascript processing speeds as well, vs. FireFox currently (which typically, Opera led FF there as well over time MOST of the time too)):
----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/25/pwn2own_2010_day_one/
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
----
Nuff said, on the subject of which browser even the "hacker/cracker/security researcher types" use, & why (security-by-obscurity, @ THE VERY LEAST).
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel.
See subject above, and see how Clone tried to libel others here on this website via his signature and was proven wrong here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632188&cid=31999288 .
Funny how that shut clone53421, eh?
Clone53421 is nothing more than a little out of work bum who can't get a job because he wastes his life on slashdot here libelling others (which is why he won't get a job, because his kind do this rampantly, and this is why suits against them are not worth it - nothing to be had in suing a "ne'er do well" like Clone53421 is why).
Why is Clone libelling apk? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
Still - They're ALL pretty good browsers though, but this "little tidbit" from a "hacker-cracker/security researcher" MAY "shed a bit of light on the subject" of which browser to use (Because Opera's the overall FASTEST currently & especially on the MOST USED OS PLATFORM THERE IS ON PCs/Servers in Windows, & consistently over time, @ HTML parse work, & again has re-seized its crown in Javascript processing speeds as well, vs. FireFox currently (which typically, Opera led FF there as well over time MOST of the time too)):
----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/25/pwn2own_2010_day_one/
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
----
Nuff said, on the subject of which browser even the "hacker/cracker/security researcher types" use, & why (security-by-obscurity, @ THE VERY LEAST).
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel.
See subject above, and see how Clone tried to libel others here on this website via his signature and was proven wrong here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632188&cid=31999288 .
Funny how that shut clone53421, eh?
Clone53421 is nothing more than a little out of work bum who can't get a job because he wastes his life on slashdot here libelling others (which is why he won't get a job, because his kind do this rampantly, and this is why suits against them are not worth it - nothing to be had in suing a "ne'er do well" like Clone53421 is why).
Why is Clone libelling apk? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
Still - They're ALL pretty good browsers though, but this "little tidbit" from a "hacker-cracker/security researcher" MAY "shed a bit of light on the subject" of which browser to use (Because Opera's the overall FASTEST currently & especially on the MOST USED OS PLATFORM THERE IS ON PCs/Servers in Windows, & consistently over time, @ HTML parse work, & again has re-seized its crown in Javascript processing speeds as well, vs. FireFox currently (which typically, Opera led FF there as well over time MOST of the time too)):
----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/25/pwn2own_2010_day_one/
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
----
Nuff said, on the subject of which browser even the "hacker/cracker/security researcher types" use, & why (security-by-obscurity, @ THE VERY LEAST).
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel.
Why's Clone libelling others here? Geek Angst!
See subject above, and see how Clone tried to libel others here on this website via his signature and was proven wrong here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632188&cid=31999288 .
Funny how that shut clone53421, eh?
Clone53421 is nothing more than a little out of work bum who can't get a job because he wastes his life on slashdot here libelling others (which is why he won't get a job, because his kind do this rampantly, and this is why suits against them are not worth it - nothing to be had in suing a "ne'er do well" like Clone53421 is why).
Why is Clone libelling apk? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
Still - They're ALL pretty good browsers though, but this "little tidbit" from a "hacker-cracker/security researcher" MAY "shed a bit of light on the subject" of which browser to use (Because Opera's the overall FASTEST currently & especially on the MOST USED OS PLATFORM THERE IS ON PCs/Servers in Windows, & consistently over time, @ HTML parse work, & again has re-seized its crown in Javascript processing speeds as well, vs. FireFox currently (which typically, Opera led FF there as well over time MOST of the time too)):
----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/25/pwn2own_2010_day_one/
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
----
Nuff said, on the subject of which browser even the "hacker/cracker/security researcher types" use, & why (security-by-obscurity, @ THE VERY LEAST).
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel, clone53421.
And clone53421? Your replying by posting as ac doesn't fool anyone either, so give it up already. There is nothing above that is unsubstantiated above whatsoever, as the urls are posted where they can be verifie
Why is Clone libelling apk in his signature here? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
Still - They're ALL pretty good browsers though, but this "little tidbit" from a "hacker-cracker/security researcher" MAY "shed a bit of light on the subject" of which browser to use (Because Opera's the overall FASTEST currently & especially on the MOST USED OS PLATFORM THERE IS ON PCs/Servers in Windows, & consistently over time, @ HTML parse work, & again has re-seized its crown in Javascript processing speeds as well, vs. FireFox currently (which typically, Opera led FF there as well over time MOST of the time too)):
----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/25/pwn2own_2010_day_one/
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
----
Nuff said, on the subject of which browser even the "hacker/cracker/security researcher types" use, & why (security-by-obscurity, @ THE VERY LEAST).
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel, clone53421.
And clone53421? Your replying by posting as ac doesn't fool anyone either, so give it up already.
See subject above, and see how Clone tried to libel others here on this website via his signature and was proven wrong here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632188&cid=31999288 .
Funny how that shut clone53421, eh?
Clone53421 is nothing more than a little out of work bum who can't get a job because he wastes his life on slashdot here libelling others (which is why he won't get a job, because his kind do this rampantly, and this is why suits against them are not worth it - nothing to be had in suing a "ne'er do well" like Clone53421 is why).
Why is Clone libelling apk? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
Still - They're ALL pretty good browsers though, but this "little tidbit" from a "hacker-cracker/security researcher" MAY "shed a bit of light on the subject" of which browser to use (Because Opera's the overall FASTEST currently & especially on the MOST USED OS PLATFORM THERE IS ON PCs/Servers in Windows, & consistently over time, @ HTML parse work, & again has re-seized its crown in Javascript processing speeds as well, vs. FireFox currently (which typically, Opera led FF there as well over time MOST of the time too)):
----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/25/pwn2own_2010_day_one/
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
----
Nuff said, on the subject of which browser even the "hacker/cracker/security researcher types" use, & why (security-by-obscurity, @ THE VERY LEAST).
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel, clone53421.
Per subject above, see here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632810&cid=32008154 and if it makes you happy to call me apk, fine. Go for it. As long as you keep taking your meds and we keep you away from sharp objects, we should all be ok, lol!
Well I actually thought you could count. I guess not. You aren’t much use to anyone, are you?
Note that this is another Windows virus that affects only Windows PCs. .exe files used by virus writers to perpetrate
It does NOT affect iPads or any Mac products.
BitDefender is likely using the iPad's popularity to widen
their Windows anti-virus audience. Most everyone knows
that Macs do not use
Windows viri. Nice attempt at publicity!
What's past is NOT ALWAYS prologue for the future!
Why are you asking others to count your change then, per my subject above? It's rather obivous that you cannot count. You burned yourself by setting yourself up like a bowling pin.
Why are you acting high and mighty, if you cannot count either?
p.s. I bet you wish you had just one of those $20 bills, I’m sure you could count that many of them
p.p.s luckily paypal can count, because I wouldn’t even dream of asking you to add $9,842.76 plus $15,000.00.
http://i40.tinypic.com/oh4aw9.jpg
clone53241, the pussy bullshit artist, attempting to play 'attorney online' lmao:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31746938
So sue him then, pussy. Go for it. I think that once your real name is known to those you libel you'll really be hurting then. Of course, no balls wimps like you are all talk. After all, You're the one talking about "exercising legal options" pussy. Go for it. What an unbelieveable little scumbag weasel and pussy, libeler, and liar that likes to be the "pot calling the kettle black". Lots of talk there clone53421, but no action, and as you said, "actions speak louder than words" big talker wannabe 'internet attorney online' that you are (that likes to libel others no less with malicious intent).
But before you do? Please explain why clone avoided admitting he stalked apk thru 3 threads and otherwise tried to b.s. him then here:
----
"In case you didn't already know this, changing your IP address to defeat Slashdot's anti-spam mechanism constitutes both fraudulently misrepresenting yourself (A CRIME, as I already told you) and also considered unauthorized access to a computer system (HACKING)." - by clone53421 (1310749) on Monday April 05, @08:25PM (#31743416)
I'll just quote the person you gave a hard time to over there on that because I am basically wondering the same and would like to see your proof too, thanks:
Oh, really? Care to show me a legal precedent OR ruling of that being the case, were I switching IP addresses to overcome the "10 posts per 24 hour limit" on AC users? I sign off as APK, so I am NOT "misrepresenting myself" here, in case you hadn't noticed, lol!
You also stated that YOU are being stalked? clone53421, you did the same to this very guy apk you were was bothering there and its stated from the outset.
Once more, clone53421 the bullshit artist with "legal options he can exercise" -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31746938 (ahem: *cough* "BULLSHIT" *cough*) doesn't seem too credible, intelligent, and is a stalker of others himself. You are pitifully stupid clone54321, you know that? The very things you said the ac apk was doing to you, you do yourself and worse. Amazing, and you wonder why you are being shamed now like this? You had it coming. Jerks like you are what ruin the internet.
See subject and prove what you stated here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1633414&cid=32040320 because I'd like to see proof that it was this apk person you have clearly libeled, trolled (through 3 different threads this past week), and lied about.
The ironically funniest part was how You clone54321 were shot down in your desperate attempt to discredit him, and you hilariously picked Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica who was busted with police being called on him for death threats to apk on Reimer's very website you used, which resulted in his forums having large tracts removed of that material and libel of apk (and his henchman below had 2 whole websites removed by CrystalTech.com), also for email harassing that apk fellow Reimer's ISP put him on a tracking ticket which made Reimer cease and desist the email harassment, impersonating him on his forums and when asked nicely to remove it?
Reimer then pursued apk to Windows IT Pro magazine with a "henchman" in a fat pig named Jay Little who said he was "an expert on Microsoft Exchange" where apk shot that down and Jay Little that obese hog with it, with proof from Microsoft themselves, using their own tty/console mode clearmem.exe app to show that due to memory fragmentation, Exchange servers are KNOWN to stall and what stops it? Memory Optimization programs. He also corrected 'the great russinovich''s work no less, a PHD, who hardcoded paths in his apps (a rookie move) and he ended up thanking apk for it, and lastly, apk predicted VISTA would fail, due to memory and caching (which it did on file copies and the fix? Alter caching in the memmgt section of the registry, here -> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/920739 ).
So much for PHD's, because as was said in "the serpent and the rainbow'? Mozart could give any Harvard PhD a run for his money. Not only did apk give Dr. Mark Russinovich a "run for his money", he outright floored him in the end there. Did you really think you could outthink and outfox that person?
You tried to on firefox 3.6's bug where Germany said to avoid firefox like they did for IE earlier, but never for opera, and you said they did, lying. Unbelievable. Then, ff issued 3.62 to cover that, & oddly the mods on this forums closed that thread 2-5 or so days earlier than usual. Why? I suspect because the last day that thread was open, firefox turned up yet another unpatched security vulnerability, which would have iced you totally (even more than you were already being dusted there already) by showing that apk is correct that ff gets a lot more bugs than Opera ever does, and takes longer to patch them typically also.
So the usual result from you, is libel and name calling as you are doing here with your insinuations as you did here, you did there. You are too predictable troll (clone54321), and because of that, very simple to out think and out maneuver.
So all that aside after I read through all of this, I had to sound off here on it because you have done the same to me clone54321 you dirty troll. So, show us where apk said that please. It wouldn't really matter if he did because you did indeed libel him here on many accounts like calling him a spyware maker which I also would be steamed about were I he too, and much more, many more times. Once MIGHT be excusable, as you were misinformed by that moron Thor Schrock, but apk told you he called CA's Greg Jensen and passed their 21 point test for malware removal, and though they did not remove his single app (of 50 or so online)? They had to downrate it to zero threat levels. Call him yourself, Mr. Informative (for what? self-modding himself up to +5 "informative" via alternate registered user account logons here? Clone's the type that does that because no way would 1 sentence above be a +5 on any sane forums, quite obviously). Fact is, he probably has a $200,000 libel suit possibility like he said because not only did CA do th
See subject and prove what you stated here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1633414&cid=32040320 because I'd like to see proof that it was this apk person you have clearly libeled, trolled (through 3 different threads this past week), and lied about.
The ironically funniest part was how You clone54321 were shot down in your desperate attempt to discredit him, and you hilariously picked Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica who was busted with police being called on him for death threats to apk on Reimer's very website you used, which resulted in his forums having large tracts removed of that material and libel of apk (and his henchman below had 2 whole websites removed by CrystalTech.com), also for email harassing that apk fellow Reimer's ISP put him on a tracking ticket which made Reimer cease and desist the email harassment, impersonating him on his forums and when asked nicely to remove it?
Reimer then pursued apk to Windows IT Pro magazine with a "henchman" in a fat pig named Jay Little who said he was "an expert on Microsoft Exchange" where apk shot that down and Jay Little that obese hog with it, with proof from Microsoft themselves, using their own tty/console mode clearmem.exe app to show that due to memory fragmentation, Exchange servers are KNOWN to stall and what stops it? Memory Optimization programs. He also corrected 'the great russinovich''s work no less, a PHD, who hardcoded paths in his apps (a rookie move) and he ended up thanking apk for it, and lastly, apk predicted VISTA would fail, due to memory and caching (which it did on file copies and the fix? Alter caching in the memmgt section of the registry, here -> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/920739 ).
So much for PHD's, because as was said in "the serpent and the rainbow'? Mozart could give any Harvard PhD a run for his money. Not only did apk give Dr. Mark Russinovich a "run for his money", he outright floored him in the end there. Did you really think you could outthink and outfox that person?
You tried to on firefox 3.6's bug where Germany said to avoid firefox like they did for IE earlier, but never for opera, and you said they did, lying. Unbelievable. Then, ff issued 3.62 to cover that, & oddly the mods on this forums closed that thread 2-5 or so days earlier than usual. Why? I suspect because the last day that thread was open, firefox turned up yet another unpatched security vulnerability, which would have iced you totally (even more than you were already being dusted there already) by showing that apk is correct that ff gets a lot more bugs than Opera ever does, and takes longer to patch them typically also.
So the usual result from you, is libel and name calling as you are doing here with your insinuations as you did here, you did there. You are too predictable troll (clone54321), and because of that, very simple to out think and out maneuver.
So all that aside after I read through all of this, I had to sound off here on it because you have done the same to me clone54321 you dirty troll. So, show us where apk said that please. It wouldn't really matter if he did because you did indeed libel him here on many accounts like calling him a spyware maker which I also would be steamed about were I he too, and much more, many more times. Once MIGHT be excusable, as you were misinformed by that moron Thor Schrock, but apk told you he called CA's Greg Jensen and passed their 21 point test for malware removal, and though they did not remove his single app (of 50 or so online)? They had to downrate it to zero threat levels. Call him yourself, Mr. Informative (for what? self-modding himself up to +5 "informative" via alternate registered user account logons here? Clone's the type that does that because no way would 1 sentence above be a +5 on any sane forums, quite obviously). Fact is, he probably has a $200,000 libel suit possibility like he said because not only did CA do th
I am not clone.
And regardless of what Clone has done, YOU are the person spamming Slashdot as part of personal vendetta. That's what's making you look ridiculous, not allegations made by Clone that you're repeating.
And yeah, you might want to cut out repeating every allegation clone has made against you in every other comment you post. Nobody cares, and given your modus-operandi, most of us are going to side with him on that.