Actually, given the ready availability of pirated discs in most cities, I can easily imagine a pirated blu-ray of a popular movie containing an exploit. Seems obvious and really useful.
Of course, since a number of important AIDS drugs (and drugs to treat other serious diseases and conditions) were developed in significant part at public labs or with public funding, the US government could assert its rights to get control of the patents. It doesn't. Why? $$$. Drug companies have it, and they give it to politicians. Big business wins, while life expectancy around the globe drops and millions die.
Well, AV software could and should be configured to identify stuff like Opener/Renepo. It's easy enough to add a signature for any type of malware to the virus signature files, and indeed the AV software makers do, at least for some stuff. Then if the AV software is configured to scan all files downloaded, emailed and/or unstuffed, a less sophisticated user is likely going to get an adequate warning before running something like Opener, thinking it is a new version of Leisure Suit Larry or a DVD ripper or something like that.
It's not just stupid people - it's most of the people using computers, who just aren't knowledgable enough to cope with some of the situations we might take in our stride.
And in one respect at least Symantec is right. Lots of us have been going on about how safe Macs are, no viruses for Macs, yada yada yada, and may have lulled some of the John Q. Public home-users into a potentially / certainly-in-the-future false sense of security.
That said, you couldn't pay me to install any of the current Symantec products on a Mac. Esp. not with ClamXav available for free, and Intego's VirusBarrier, which has had very sexy, French people staffing its MacWorld Expo booths in years past - reason enough alone to send them oodles of money.
And as for Symantec's "three nightmares" - here's a current headline from ZDnet:
Microsoft to launch anti-virus, anti-spyware products
Law enforcement - esp. federal LE - is always going on about lacking the money and tools to fight crime - not just computer crime but any kind of crime.
And there is a lot of truth in it. They drive around in their old Ford sedans, following criminals driving Audis, BMWs, Ferraris... They can't keep up, and they stand out like sore thumbs. Trying to get into exclusive nightclubs in tacky suits? Wearing flea market sunglasses in Palm Beach? And of course other examples, like having crap computers, too little staff, etc.
But the real reason that federal LE has a hard time catching crims is that they are neither very bright, nor very competent, that departments are full of time-serving hacks and corruption and malfeance common.
Many, perhaps most, of their big busts and successes come from informants - an area where the departments, esp. DEA, spend a lot of money - and from people busted through bad luck rolling over on everyone and sundry so as to walk away scot-free, often with their ill-gotten loot still safely pocketed.
This phishing bust is probably much in that way - more bribery than detective work.
If what you seek is more arrests and convictions from federal law enforcement don't look to increasing the budget spent on cybercrime or whatever area you are concerned about - just have them spend more money on informants and venal deals.
My membership number at the video store is 666 - does that count? I had hoped that this would at least entitle me to rent The Omen for free, but no such luck...
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, given the ready availability of pirated discs in most cities, I can easily imagine a pirated blu-ray of a popular movie containing an exploit. Seems obvious and really useful.
Of course, since a number of important AIDS drugs (and drugs to treat other serious diseases and conditions) were developed in significant part at public labs or with public funding, the US government could assert its rights to get control of the patents. It doesn't. Why? $$$. Drug companies have it, and they give it to politicians. Big business wins, while life expectancy around the globe drops and millions die.
Well, AV software could and should be configured to identify stuff like Opener/Renepo. It's easy enough to add a signature for any type of malware to the virus signature files, and indeed the AV software makers do, at least for some stuff. Then if the AV software is configured to scan all files downloaded, emailed and/or unstuffed, a less sophisticated user is likely going to get an adequate warning before running something like Opener, thinking it is a new version of Leisure Suit Larry or a DVD ripper or something like that.
It's not just stupid people - it's most of the people using computers, who just aren't knowledgable enough to cope with some of the situations we might take in our stride.
And in one respect at least Symantec is right. Lots of us have been going on about how safe Macs are, no viruses for Macs, yada yada yada, and may have lulled some of the John Q. Public home-users into a potentially / certainly-in-the-future false sense of security.
That said, you couldn't pay me to install any of the current Symantec products on a Mac. Esp. not with ClamXav available for free, and Intego's VirusBarrier, which has had very sexy, French people staffing its MacWorld Expo booths in years past - reason enough alone to send them oodles of money.
And as for Symantec's "three nightmares" - here's a current headline from ZDnet:
Microsoft to launch anti-virus, anti-spyware products
Law enforcement - esp. federal LE - is always going on about lacking the money and tools to fight crime - not just computer crime but any kind of crime. And there is a lot of truth in it. They drive around in their old Ford sedans, following criminals driving Audis, BMWs, Ferraris... They can't keep up, and they stand out like sore thumbs. Trying to get into exclusive nightclubs in tacky suits? Wearing flea market sunglasses in Palm Beach? And of course other examples, like having crap computers, too little staff, etc. But the real reason that federal LE has a hard time catching crims is that they are neither very bright, nor very competent, that departments are full of time-serving hacks and corruption and malfeance common. Many, perhaps most, of their big busts and successes come from informants - an area where the departments, esp. DEA, spend a lot of money - and from people busted through bad luck rolling over on everyone and sundry so as to walk away scot-free, often with their ill-gotten loot still safely pocketed. This phishing bust is probably much in that way - more bribery than detective work. If what you seek is more arrests and convictions from federal law enforcement don't look to increasing the budget spent on cybercrime or whatever area you are concerned about - just have them spend more money on informants and venal deals.
My membership number at the video store is 666 - does that count? I had hoped that this would at least entitle me to rent The Omen for free, but no such luck...