• Welcome to Tux Reports: Where Penguins Fly. We hope you find the topics varied, interesting, and worthy of your time. Please become a member and join in the discussions.

Report: 48% of 22 million scanned computers infected with malware

F

Frank

Flightless Bird
On 7/8/2010 6:16 PM, Alias wrote:
> On 07/09/2010 02:00 AM, Boscoe wrote:
>> On 08/07/2010 4:33 PM, Alias wrote:
>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/...-scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.
>>>
>>
>> You are a little troll... get your knackers around this...
>> <http://blogs.computerworld.com/16316/think_linux_is_free_from_malware_think_again_its_been_hacked>
>>
>>
>
> Gosh, one trojan only available through IRC whereas Windows has millions
> of malware written for it and has a far larger percentage of infected
> computers than Linux does. Wrap your mind around that and STFU.
>
I'm not the one who has been making the obviously stupid statement about
linux not being venerable to infections...that stupid cock sucking piece
of useless lying shit would be you...the fucking asshole creep of the
universe!...LOL!
Oops!
Now you STFU!
 
M

Mr2U

Flightless Bird
Re: Report: 48% of 22 million scanned computers infected with malware <---- 98% of the people here are trolls
 
D

DanS

Flightless Bird
Big Steel Shoe Kicker <Steel7@ShoeKicker7.com> wrote in
news:UZ-dnSdTYLsiG6vRnZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@earthlink.com:

> On 7/8/2010 8:00 PM, Boscoe wrote:
>> On 08/07/2010 4:33 PM, Alias wrote:
>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-million
>>> -scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.
>>>
>>
>> You are a little troll... get your knackers around this...
>> <http://blogs.computerworld.com/16316/think_linux_is_free_f
>> rom_malware_think_again_its_been_hacked>
>>
>
> Why bother with this? All that's going to happen is
> Linuxtrolls will have some type of excuse, and they won't
> believe their lying eyes.

Right.......so using social engineering and tricking a Windows
user into installing a trojan by presenting them with what
appears to be a valid program is deemed a user security issue,
not a Windows problem......

.......yet *EXACTLY* the same situation under Linux and it's an
OS deficiency ? (Rhetorical.)

Don't even bother replying, because there's virtually no
chance that you'll have anything to say that's has any hint of
intelligence or logic about the subject at hand.
 
B

Boscoe

Flightless Bird
On 09/07/2010 2:16 AM, Alias wrote:
> On 07/09/2010 02:00 AM, Boscoe wrote:
>> On 08/07/2010 4:33 PM, Alias wrote:
>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/...-scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.
>>>
>>
>> You are a little troll... get your knackers around this...
>> <http://blogs.computerworld.com/16316/think_linux_is_free_from_malware_think_again_its_been_hacked>
>>
>>
>
> Gosh, one trojan only available through IRC whereas Windows has millions
> of malware written for it and has a far larger percentage of infected
> computers than Linux does. Wrap your mind around that and STFU.
>

Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably, the trojan
was written for Linux and very puzzling in itself, since Linux has such
a small user base.
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
On 7/9/2010 3:15 PM, Boscoe wrote:
> On 09/07/2010 2:16 AM, Alias wrote:
>> On 07/09/2010 02:00 AM, Boscoe wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2010 4:33 PM, Alias wrote:
>>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/...-scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are a little troll... get your knackers around this...
>>> <http://blogs.computerworld.com/16316/think_linux_is_free_from_malware_think_again_its_been_hacked>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Gosh, one trojan only available through IRC whereas Windows has millions
>> of malware written for it and has a far larger percentage of infected
>> computers than Linux does. Wrap your mind around that and STFU.
>>
>
> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably, the trojan was
> written for Linux and very puzzling in itself, since Linux has such a
> small user base.

And it needed user input and was nuked soon after it appeared. BFD. The
hundreds of thousands of Windows boxes in net bots is much more serious
and you know it.

--
Alias
 
D

DanS

Flightless Bird
Boscoe <laughingboy47@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:mhFZn.70974$hS4.43613@newsfe26.ams2:

> On 09/07/2010 2:16 AM, Alias wrote:
>> On 07/09/2010 02:00 AM, Boscoe wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2010 4:33 PM, Alias wrote:
>>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-millio
>>>> n-scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are a little troll... get your knackers around
>>> this...
>>> <http://blogs.computerworld.com/16316/think_linux_is_free_
>>> from_malware_think_again_its_been_hacked>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Gosh, one trojan only available through IRC whereas
>> Windows has millions of malware written for it and has a
>> far larger percentage of infected computers than Linux
>> does. Wrap your mind around that and STFU.
>>
>
> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,
> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in
> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.

Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of
prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus
that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.
This one however, did not.

As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan
anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the
*source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked
version, it wasn't a binary.
 
B

Boscoe

Flightless Bird
On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:
> Boscoe<laughingboy47@hotmail.com> wrote in>
>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,
>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in
>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.
>
> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of
> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus
> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.
> This one however, did not.
>
> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan
> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the
> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked
> version, it wasn't a binary.
>

They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well
they are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.
Tiresome.
 
H

Heywood Jablowme

Flightless Bird
Re: Report: 1 out of 22 million scanned computers infected with trojans...

<kevpan815@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:i162l8$33s$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> how is your vagina doing frank?

You really are a sick fuck. Too bad you will NEVER see a real vagina again
in your lifetime! Now stop talking about it. It's probably best the you
power down your PC and have a Jerk Off session.
 
H

Heywood Jablowme

Flightless Bird
<kevpan815@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:i161d3$n1$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> HOW IS YOUR VAGINA DOING FRANK?

You sure like talking about something you will NEVER see or touch again in
your lifetime! HA HA HA HA HA - Now go find a Sheep to fuck!

Just FYI.
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:
> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:
>> Boscoe<laughingboy47@hotmail.com> wrote in>
>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,
>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in
>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.
>>
>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of
>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus
>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.
>> This one however, did not.
>>
>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan
>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the
>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked
>> version, it wasn't a binary.
>>
>
> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well they
> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse. Tiresome.

You're kidding, right?

--
Alias
 
B

Big Steel Shoe Kicker

Flightless Bird
On 7/9/2010 8:27 AM, DanS wrote:

<snipped>

Get lost you boring piece of fucking crap, I don't want to be bothered
with you, as your dumbass is liable to start going off the deep-end
again you damn Linuxtroll.
 
B

Boscoe

Flightless Bird
On 09/07/2010 4:34 PM, Alias wrote:
> On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:
>> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:
>>> Boscoe<laughingboy47@hotmail.com> wrote in>
>>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,
>>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in
>>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.
>>>
>>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of
>>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus
>>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.
>>> This one however, did not.
>>>
>>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan
>>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the
>>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked
>>> version, it wasn't a binary.
>>>
>>
>> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well they
>> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.
>> Tiresome.
>
> You're kidding, right?
>

No, are you?

They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the road who fiddles
around with his car engine every Sunday morning. And you know it's sad
but true.
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
On 07/09/2010 06:07 PM, Boscoe wrote:
> On 09/07/2010 4:34 PM, Alias wrote:
>> On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:
>>> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:
>>>> Boscoe<laughingboy47@hotmail.com> wrote in>
>>>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,
>>>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in
>>>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.
>>>>
>>>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of
>>>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus
>>>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.
>>>> This one however, did not.
>>>>
>>>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan
>>>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the
>>>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked
>>>> version, it wasn't a binary.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well they
>>> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.
>>> Tiresome.
>>
>> You're kidding, right?
>>
>
> No, are you?
>
> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the road who fiddles
> around with his car engine every Sunday morning. And you know it's sad
> but true.

May have been true ten years ago. Now Linux is going mainstream and it
isn't true any more. It's just stale MS FUD and only uninformed fools
like you believe it. If you were to install Ubuntu or Mint, you wouldn't
know what you just posted is crap.

--
Alias
 
D

DanS

Flightless Bird
Boscoe <laughingboy47@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:iWGZn.182777$k15.2229@hurricane:

> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:
>> Boscoe<laughingboy47@hotmail.com> wrote in>
>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected.
>>> Presumably, the trojan was written for Linux and very
>>> puzzling in itself, since Linux has such a small user
>>> base.
>>
>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of
>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux
>> trojan/virus that actually replicates in the wild and
>> causes a problem. This one however, did not.
>>
>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan
>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow
>> the *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a
>> borked version, it wasn't a binary.
>>
>
> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux
> brotherhood - well they are bit of joke, aren't they? -
> has always got some poor excuse. Tiresome.

I don't quite know how to interpret your reply....

Let's see..."fuss about nothing"....maybe, maybe not. I didn't
see any indication of how the source code got replaced.

....."a bit of a joke, aren't they ?".....some are, most not.
Just as the very vocal MS users are a joke too, most users are
not. Do you think the Windows users (trolls) here that
constantly attack Linux aren't a joke too ? Or rather, do you
see them as intelligent, together, well-spoken individuals ?

....."always some poor excuse."....reasons, excuses, who's to
say what's what...

.....I personally don't think the happenings in the linked
article represent any inherent issues with Linux security, or
the start of a flood of malware for Linux.....
 
D

DanS

Flightless Bird
>> You're kidding, right?
>>
>
> No, are you?
>
> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the
> road who fiddles around with his car engine every Sunday
> morning. And you know it's sad but true.

Personally, the only 'tinkering' I've ever done with my Linux
boxes, is done directly after install time and that's only to
get everything working as I like, installed, etc.

Once all is up and running, I don't screw with the system at
all. What's the point ?

Unless of course you mean trying s/w. I mean, if it works, what
is there to mess round with ?
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
On 7/9/2010 6:39 PM, DanS wrote:
>>> You're kidding, right?
>>>
>>
>> No, are you?
>>
>> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the
>> road who fiddles around with his car engine every Sunday
>> morning. And you know it's sad but true.
>
> Personally, the only 'tinkering' I've ever done with my Linux
> boxes, is done directly after install time and that's only to
> get everything working as I like, installed, etc.
>
> Once all is up and running, I don't screw with the system at
> all. What's the point ?
>
> Unless of course you mean trying s/w. I mean, if it works, what
> is there to mess round with ?

The same tinkering is done with Windows. The fool is just revealing his
stereotypical views of Linux users that he learned by reading MS FUD.

--
Alias
 
H

Heywood Jablowme

Flightless Bird
"Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
news:i17inh$qe9$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> On 07/09/2010 06:07 PM, Boscoe wrote:
>> On 09/07/2010 4:34 PM, Alias wrote:
>>> On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:
>>>> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:
>>>>> Boscoe<laughingboy47@hotmail.com> wrote in>
>>>>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,
>>>>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in
>>>>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of
>>>>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus
>>>>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.
>>>>> This one however, did not.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan
>>>>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the
>>>>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked
>>>>> version, it wasn't a binary.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well
>>>> they
>>>> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.
>>>> Tiresome.
>>>
>>> You're kidding, right?
>>>
>>
>> No, are you?
>>
>> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the road who fiddles
>> around with his car engine every Sunday morning. And you know it's sad
>> but true.
>
> May have been true ten years ago. Now Linux is going mainstream and it
> isn't true any more. It's just stale MS FUD and only uninformed fools like
> you believe it. If you were to install Ubuntu or Mint, you wouldn't know
> what you just posted is crap.
>
> --
> Alias

Must be a pretty small stream Linux is in. Linux has been around for many
years yet most reject Linux as garbage. As they should.

Stick with Windows to get any real work done.
 
B

Boscoe

Flightless Bird
On 09/07/2010 5:36 PM, DanS wrote:

> ...."a bit of a joke, aren't they ?".....some are, most not.
> Just as the very vocal MS users are a joke too, most users are
> not. Do you think the Windows users (trolls) here that
> constantly attack Linux aren't a joke too ? Or rather, do you
> see them as intelligent, together, well-spoken individuals ?
>
>
>

Because it's not a moderated group you will get individuals on here who,
because of their
own inadequacies, seem happy to destroy a Windows group that's here to
help people. It's neither clever or mature
but a sad fact of life. As for posting how good Linux is on an open
Windows 7 group, what do you expect?
So, Windows uses won't be flamed for posting how great Windows is in a
Linux group? Must try it sometime.
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
On 07/09/2010 07:47 PM, Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
> news:i17inh$qe9$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On 07/09/2010 06:07 PM, Boscoe wrote:
>>> On 09/07/2010 4:34 PM, Alias wrote:
>>>> On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:
>>>>> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:
>>>>>> Boscoe<laughingboy47@hotmail.com> wrote in>
>>>>>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,
>>>>>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in
>>>>>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of
>>>>>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus
>>>>>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.
>>>>>> This one however, did not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan
>>>>>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the
>>>>>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked
>>>>>> version, it wasn't a binary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well
>>>>> they
>>>>> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.
>>>>> Tiresome.
>>>>
>>>> You're kidding, right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, are you?
>>>
>>> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the road who fiddles
>>> around with his car engine every Sunday morning. And you know it's sad
>>> but true.
>>
>> May have been true ten years ago. Now Linux is going mainstream and it
>> isn't true any more. It's just stale MS FUD and only uninformed fools
>> like you believe it. If you were to install Ubuntu or Mint, you
>> wouldn't know what you just posted is crap.
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> Must be a pretty small stream Linux is in. Linux has been around for
> many years yet most reject Linux as garbage. As they should.

Only those who are too stupid to install and configure it like YOU.

>
> Stick with Windows to get any real work done.

You don't have any real work to get done.

--
Alias
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top