Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Lets tell a tale of exploit horror mwhahaha!!

  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    25

    Default

    If you know how to get in a network, then you should know what to do to stop a cracker.
    As linux is getting more popular, the virusboyzz will write evil code for linux to.
    Thats also the reason that there are'nt that many of evil-code for linux.

    Because windows is a more used os, it will give the most damage if you write a virus.

  2. #12
    Jenkem Addict imported_wyze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,543

    Default

    @blulite - With a signature like that, I'm not shocked that it happened
    dd if=/dev/swc666 of=/dev/wyze

  3. #13
    Senior Member ShadowKill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ReckaH View Post
    If you know how to get in a network, then you should know what to do to stop a cracker.
    As linux is getting more popular, the virusboyzz will write evil code for linux to.
    Thats also the reason that there are'nt that many of evil-code for linux.

    Because windows is a more used os, it will give the most damage if you write a virus.
    Not only is that a very false statistic but it is very false logic as well. There is no direct correlation between the proliferation of Windows and the amounts of viruses for it, or any other system for that matter. Viruses for *nix environments are as prevalent, if not more so, than Windows systems. I peg you as a Windows user, which explains why you are misinformed....



    "The goal of every man should be to continue living even after he can no longer draw breath."

    ~ShadowKill

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,008

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShadowKill View Post
    Not only is that a very false statistic but it is very false logic as well. There is no direct correlation between the proliferation of Windows and the amounts of viruses for it, or any other system for that matter. Viruses for *nix environments are as prevalent, if not more so, than Windows systems. I peg you as a Windows user, which explains why you are misinformed....
    Care to back up this statement with some proof? The fact remains that there still exists more malware written for Windows based machines than Linux based, although Linux is catching up. The reason(s) for this can naturally be discussed, but I have always fancied the explanation that the more widespread use of Windows makes it a more attractive target along with the fact that Windows platforms by default have been more vulnerable than most Linux distributions.

    I will be happy to be proven wrong by you, but feel like your statement goes against all previous information on the topic I have read.
    -Monkeys are like nature's humans.

  5. #15
    Senior Member ShadowKill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by =Tron= View Post
    Care to back up this statement with some proof? The fact remains that there still exists more malware written for Windows based machines than Linux based, although Linux is catching up. The reason(s) for this can naturally be discussed, but I have always fancied the explanation that the more widespread use of Windows makes it a more attractive target along with the fact that Windows platforms by default have been more vulnerable than most Linux distributions.

    I will be happy to be proven wrong by you, but feel like your statement goes against all previous information on the topic I have read.
    This should sum it up just fine but I'd love to have some in-depth discussion with you should you still disagree, on another thread perhaps....


    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10...ndows_viruses/

    EDIT: I should ad that perhaps "virus" was used incorrectly in my previous post. It would have been more accurate to say that there are as many, if not more, security concerns including viruses for Linux as there are for Windows....



    "The goal of every man should be to continue living even after he can no longer draw breath."

    ~ShadowKill

  6. #16
    Just burned his ISO
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    7

    Default

    @blulite
    .....What?
    What does that have to do with Backtrack, or even Linux?

    I have 5 computers, 1 running XP. No AV. Why? I know what I'm doing. I don't download random executables or other stupid stuff. It's common sense. I do run a scan every 6 months or so. Results? No viruses.

    Would you take candy from a stranger, if the stranger said it was okay?
    Point proven.

  7. #17
    Just burned his ISO
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShadowKill View Post
    This should sum it up just fine but I'd love to have some in-depth discussion with you should you still disagree, on another thread perhaps....

    EDIT: I should ad that perhaps "virus" was used incorrectly in my previous post. It would have been more accurate to say that there are as many, if not more, security concerns including viruses for Linux as there are for Windows....
    To be honest if linux were ever to become the desktop standard, it will get it's fair share of exploits. Even after reading quite a bit on linux vs windows security, their remains one statistic left out of all the reports:

    There will never be an end to ignorant users regardless of their OS of choice. Nor will there be an end to the users that care to exploit said users.

    With that said, I think the linux community is near sighted in that fact because they do not suffer the amount of users ignorant of security concerns like Microsoft does. Yes linux is harder to exploit, but that's because the majority of linux users know what they are doing as apposed to the majority of Windows users not knowing what they are doing.

    Given that, if the number of ignorant users running linux multiplies exponentially, so will the attempts to exploit these users.

    It's a prevalent human trend regardless of the system being exploited.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,008

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShadowKill View Post
    This should sum it up just fine but I'd love to have some in-depth discussion with you should you still disagree, on another thread perhaps....


    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10...ndows_viruses/

    EDIT: I should ad that perhaps "virus" was used incorrectly in my previous post. It would have been more accurate to say that there are as many, if not more, security concerns including viruses for Linux as there are for Windows....
    No need to continue the debate as I think that we probably to a large part would share the same view after all and that I might have read too much into the use of the word virus in your first post.

    Nevertheless, I do believe that the way that Windows is built does make it easier for inexperienced users to hurt themselves by accessing malicious content than Linux. The article that you linked to, although 5 years old, does also seem to share my view that Windows by default is a more insecure platform than Linux, which your claim "that there are as many, if not more, security concerns including viruses for Linux as there are for Windows" seems to contradict.

    The last part of the article, quoted below, sums up the general view expressed in it as a whole quite nicely.
    Quote Originally Posted by Linux vs. Windows Viruses
    Security is, as we all know, a process, not a product. So when you use Linux, you're not using a perfectly safe OS. There is no such thing. But Linux and Mac OS X establish a more secure footing than Microsoft Windows, one that makes it far harder for viruses to take hold in the first place, but if one does take hold, harder to damage the system, but if one succeeds in damaging the system, harder to spread to other machines and repeat the process. When it comes to email-borne viruses and worms, Linux may not be completely immune - after all, nothing is immune to human gullibility and stupidity - but it is much more resistant. To mess up a Linux box, you need to work at it; to mess up your Windows box, you just need to work on it. I know which one I'll trust. How about you?
    EDIT: Actually, Sindustry's post probably managed to mirror my view better than this one made by myself.
    -Monkeys are like nature's humans.

  9. #19
    Senior Member ShadowKill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    908

    Default

    Oh I agree entirely with both of you, please don't get me wrong. What I was referring to as far as ReckaH's post was that Microsoft's being widespread really has nothing directly to do with the number of viruses/exploits written specifically for the Windows platform. It has everything to do with horrible architecture, and even worse security conscious developers. Linux is very resilient, we know this, but that does not remove the human factor in the least. I found more ways to break Gentoo when I started out than I ever did with Windows, just because it was new to me and I wanted to see what I could do.

    Windows, on the other hand, has a very typical stencil stigma. People enjoy doing one or two things, exactly the way they were designed, over and over and over again because it's known to them, and the masses generally hate change. Social engineering plays a HUGE part in why windows is so insecure. However, it still remains that Windows and Linux are both vulnerable and are becoming more so every day. It comes down to poor architecture and lack of fundamental security knowledge among the general user populous.



    "The goal of every man should be to continue living even after he can no longer draw breath."

    ~ShadowKill

  10. #20
    Senior Member streaker69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginville, BlueBall, Bird In Hand, Intercourse, Paradise, PA
    Posts
    3,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gr33n3gg View Post
    @blulite
    .....What?
    What does that have to do with Backtrack, or even Linux?

    I have 5 computers, 1 running XP. No AV. Why? I know what I'm doing. I don't download random executables or other stupid stuff. It's common sense. I do run a scan every 6 months or so. Results? No viruses.

    Would you take candy from a stranger, if the stranger said it was okay?
    Point proven.
    There have been dozens of 0Day exploits out there for XP, many of them pushed from 'innocent' sites that an average person would visit every day. Not p0rn sites, nor warez sites, but everyday average sites.

    Just this week, I found that the PA state DEP site was pushing a virus through one of their older subsites. You may think you know what you're doing, but the people who write the malware and are able to get it injected into 100,000 websites around the world, know more than you do.

    You have been lucky so far, but eventually, you'll get hit.
    A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •