|
Posted by R. McCarty on January 2, 2006, 10:10 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Correction - Last line should read "the user ISN'T', instead of is.
>I wasn't taking exception to your analysis - just that these jackasses
> are always looking for new ways to get a toe hold on a computer.
> Build the wall higher and they dig under it. Make it thicker and they
> use a software trampoline to jump over. I agree that most Malware
> gets on from bad browsing or download habits. The best Security
> software in the world can't stop the "This is dangerous !" and they
> go right ahead and Click into - Poker, Porno and "Freebies". Trying
> to keep a PC "Safe-&-Secure" takes as much time as you spend
> actually using the thing. You can teach a PC, unfortunately the user
> is quite as quick a learner.
>
>> R. McCarty wrote:
>>> What about the latest Wmf exposure with IE ? - If I understand it
>>> correctly, it requires only the visiting of an infected web site.
>>> Here's an interesting FAQ on it:
>>> http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?rss&storyid=994
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I never claimed that the danger didn't exist, only that it was a
>> relatively rare, compared to the malware distributors who rely upon the
>> uninformed or lazy consumer.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bruce Chambers
>>
>> Help us help you:
>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>>
>> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
>> both at once. - RAH
>
>
| 
XML site map