Re: RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Posted by
Smoke
on 2001-12-02 08:23:25 UTC
True...some protection is better than none at all! But it's nice to know
you CAN catch some of them and maybe even do something about it. Maybe a
web site where individuals can post the ISP addresses of known viruses
sources is in order? Then maybe some programming genius can do some real
good by writing a virus that will attack the ISP addresses (computers) which
originate the viruses. Perhaps he/she'd get lucky and destroy the ones
coming from the government as well.
BTW...isn't there a way of finding out (generally) where a particular
address is coming from, or a way of sending a message to the address?
Smoke
you CAN catch some of them and maybe even do something about it. Maybe a
web site where individuals can post the ISP addresses of known viruses
sources is in order? Then maybe some programming genius can do some real
good by writing a virus that will attack the ISP addresses (computers) which
originate the viruses. Perhaps he/she'd get lucky and destroy the ones
coming from the government as well.
BTW...isn't there a way of finding out (generally) where a particular
address is coming from, or a way of sending a message to the address?
Smoke
>You only get messages for known attacks. One of
> the favorite ways of attacking these days are through bugs/holes in
> firewalls. It may upset some of you to know the government can and has
> directed such holes in the past, and they often get exploited by
> non-government hackers. Seen the recent exchange between McAfee and the
> FBI over Magic Lantern? Imagine how much goes on you don't know about.
> Although I'm not recommending that you do not run firewall software, I
> am warning that it is much less protection than you may think.
> You need to keep your OS software updated constantly, which also has
> problems - recently many Linux users lost their hardrives to a new
> kernel bug. There are no perfect solutions) - backup, be prudent.
>
> Mike
Discussion Thread
Gene Christianson
2001-12-01 15:44:50 UTC
"Attachments killer"
Bill Vance
2001-12-01 16:26:20 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Fredrik Krook
2001-12-01 16:34:59 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Mike Partain
2001-12-01 17:10:01 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Ian Wright
2001-12-02 01:39:39 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Tony Jeffree
2001-12-02 03:32:59 UTC
Re: "Attachments killer"
Michael Milligan
2001-12-02 04:43:36 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: "Attachments killer"
Smoke
2001-12-02 07:54:15 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Mike Partain
2001-12-02 08:06:59 UTC
OT: RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Smoke
2001-12-02 08:23:25 UTC
Re: RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
wanliker@a...
2001-12-02 08:40:50 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Marcus & Eva
2001-12-02 13:55:11 UTC
Re: RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Scott A. Stephens
2001-12-02 13:59:48 UTC
Re: RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
carlcnc@y...
2001-12-02 14:04:12 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"
Jon Elson
2001-12-02 21:45:09 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] "Attachments killer"