Yes, as an excuse it's pretty lousy. The difference is in the propagation of attacks. Linux had more manual attacks. This could be for several reasons:
The Windows boxes were already writting home to Mommy on the IRC because of automatic exploits, and so didn't need to be manually exploited.
Linux servers had more "interesting" data -- i.e. were more worth manually hacking.
The problem isn't that professionals are necessarily better than amateurs at a task -- we know this isn't true. But being a professional allows you to work full-time on something. Many people are motivated by financial rewards (and egoboo doesn't put bread on the table, either).
When a lot of money gets involved, organized crime gets involved, and they bring with them the infrastructure for serious misdeeds.
Where did you get that idea? I admit didn't have time to read the entire paper thoroughly -- I just skimmed it -- but I don't see any anti-Windows sentiment discussed. They're pretty clear that they think the motive for SoBig was spam:
5.4 Motive to Writing SoBig ......
We believe that Sobig was most likely written to support spam software. Any user or developer of spam mailing software, including Ruslan Ibragimov and Send-Safe, would be financially eager to leverage malware such as Sobig.
Writing viruses for spam propagation is big business.\
I'm running OSX 10.2.8, fully patched. I fired up my old IE 5.2.1 (4717). The link text is www.microsoft.com and the status bar is www.microsoft.com, but the page goes to google and the URl on that page shows www.google.com.
I never did get Safari 1.0.3 to show me a status bar, so that one doesn't really matter.
Firefox 0.9 fom 6/14/04: link text is microsoft.com, status bar is google.com, page is google.com.
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
The problem with protecting SSNs is that they're already out of the bag and there's no good way to put them back. The SSN is no longer a secret. We need another way to handle authentication.
In the second place, they're lousy numbers. They don't even have check digits, fer cryin' out loud.
There are worse threats. Right now, virus writers seem to be distracted by the easy money from spam, botnets, etc.
I'm not sure this is bad. I think I'd rather be cluttering the net with more spam than rewriting my hard drives. Fortunately, my sistem has been, if not hardened, at least pretty thoroughly gelled.
Aliens must look down at the US electoral process, and regard it in a similar way as the US has regarded other countries electoral systems - IE; Broken and unsatisafactory.
In this, I think, the younger audience is smarter. We tend to let the politicians talk around everything. I'm more likely to trust the supporting information from other sources (factcheck.org, for example) anyway.
One of my jobs is writing infosec policy for a big corporation. Actual policy needs to be clear, concise, and to the point. Yes, the devil is in the details -- but you have to have the policy first, or you'll find yourself chasing your tail. Politicians do lots of tail-chasing.
Section 6 is about security (at least, that's what the TOC says). The index doesn't have an entry for wireless, so I guess it isn't in there. There's another book called Network Security First Step by Thomas M. Thomas. That does include wireless security. Also, the TOC for that one isn't nearly so cute.
I find it interesting that people who lambast the DMCA say that WEP should be enough. I agree, mind, I just find it interesting.
If WEP were a DRM, we'd be all over it.
...on two counts. One, that negative comments about Islam (or Christianity, or Republicans, or Democrats) could be considered a crime, and two, that they arrested someone who didn't actually make them.
I don't know whether to hope they find the person who made the comments or not. I suppose that putting into law the idea that you are responsible for users' actions might be worse than suppressing free speech.
There's an interesting white paper on Taiwanese spam from a legal firm there that specializes in intellectual property. I suspect that many of the reasons Taiwan has so much spam may also apply to South Korea.
Slashdot Mirror
Triffids!
The problem isn't that professionals are necessarily better than amateurs at a task -- we know this isn't true. But being a professional allows you to work full-time on something. Many people are motivated by financial rewards (and egoboo doesn't put bread on the table, either).
When a lot of money gets involved, organized crime gets involved, and they bring with them the infrastructure for serious misdeeds.
I want my script kiddiez back.
I'm running OSX 10.2.8, fully patched. I fired up my old IE 5.2.1 (4717). The link text is www.microsoft.com and the status bar is www.microsoft.com, but the page goes to google and the URl on that page shows www.google.com.
I never did get Safari 1.0.3 to show me a status bar, so that one doesn't really matter.
Firefox 0.9 fom 6/14/04: link text is microsoft.com, status bar is google.com, page is google.com.
Of course they are. If all those state lines hadn't been gerrymandered, we wouldn't be in this situation!
The problem with protecting SSNs is that they're already out of the bag and there's no good way to put them back. The SSN is no longer a secret. We need another way to handle authentication.
In the second place, they're lousy numbers. They don't even have check digits, fer cryin' out loud.
There are worse threats. Right now, virus writers seem to be distracted by the easy money from spam, botnets, etc. I'm not sure this is bad. I think I'd rather be cluttering the net with more spam than rewriting my hard drives. Fortunately, my sistem has been, if not hardened, at least pretty thoroughly gelled.
You mean the alien that Bush wears on his back, right?
Maybe Castro will send elections supervisors to help.
Phishing will go away when identity theft goes away. What's the easiest way to get information? Ask.
Cool! Maybe we'll get ceramic eyeglasses.
Dude, they have cell phones: http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200405/kt200405301 4042653460.htm
In this, I think, the younger audience is smarter. We tend to let the politicians talk around everything. I'm more likely to trust the supporting information from other sources (factcheck.org, for example) anyway. One of my jobs is writing infosec policy for a big corporation. Actual policy needs to be clear, concise, and to the point. Yes, the devil is in the details -- but you have to have the policy first, or you'll find yourself chasing your tail. Politicians do lots of tail-chasing.
Section 6 is about security (at least, that's what the TOC says). The index doesn't have an entry for wireless, so I guess it isn't in there. There's another book called Network Security First Step by Thomas M. Thomas. That does include wireless security. Also, the TOC for that one isn't nearly so cute.
I find it interesting that people who lambast the DMCA say that WEP should be enough. I agree, mind, I just find it interesting. If WEP were a DRM, we'd be all over it.
The patent is dated May 1, 2001. The earliest download I can find for NoCatAuth is dated July 12, 2001. I so believe this patent.
You've never heard Richard Thompson's cover of "Oops I Did it Again, have you? It's great.
DNA does have metadata: there are the rules about whether or not particular genes are expressed, and when.
...on two counts. One, that negative comments about Islam (or Christianity, or Republicans, or Democrats) could be considered a crime, and two, that they arrested someone who didn't actually make them. I don't know whether to hope they find the person who made the comments or not. I suppose that putting into law the idea that you are responsible for users' actions might be worse than suppressing free speech.
There's an interesting white paper on Taiwanese spam from a legal firm there that specializes in intellectual property. I suspect that many of the reasons Taiwan has so much spam may also apply to South Korea.