Re: [SLUG] Insight on Code Red II

From: William T. Wright (t.wright1@mindspring.com)
Date: Tue Aug 07 2001 - 18:56:01 EDT


Code Red is just another example of the poor security in the MS-Windows OS,
right up there with the "Back Orifice" hack, MS-Outlook, and that silly
cartoon paperclip. If anything, these virus/worm/trojan-horse scares should
make it pretty obvious that MS-Windows is vulnerable to all kinds of
malicious code, and it won't get any better.

One of the reasons I migrated off of MS-Windows was to have something with
some degree of immunity. Granted, there are viruses out there that go after
Linux/Unix boxes, but it seems target-#1-with-a-bullet is MS-Windows.Some of
it has to do with Windows' monopoly position on the desktop, but a big chunk
of it has to be its vulnerability. Criminals prey on the weak. All those
*.vbs scripts that exploit MS-Outlook's weaknesses don't work on KMail, and I
have no "explorer.exe" to overwrite or corrupt. It little like trying to
infect a dog with the common cold.

These scares look like a good opportunity to politely show off the built-in
security features of Linux and Unix. Those "honey pot" Samba servers can make
for a convincing argument. Microsoft rushed a patch out to correct this
problem, another band-aide. One of these days, a smark cracker is going to
develop a Superflu that's going to really raise havoc for MS-Windows users,
something like Jim Beamguard's "Virtual Havoc" piece in last Sunday's
Tribune, only worse. It's time to stop wearing that big MS-Windows bullseye.
Linux offers a very attractive alternative.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:49:17 EDT