I know this is off topic however, a large number of you appear to have
viruses. That notice from Microsoft you got in your email about a security
patch was not from Microsoft. It was a virus...To kill it see the link.
http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_100662.htm

Also I saw this one:
http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_99273.htm

If you don't have anti-virus get it, if you have it keep it up to date.
NEVER open anything you are not expecting!

In article >,
"Brian & Mary Adams" > wrote:

> I know this is off topic however, a large number of you appear to have
> viruses. That notice from Microsoft you got in your email about a security
> patch was not from Microsoft. It was a virus...To kill it see the link.
> http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_100662.htm
>
> Also I saw this one:
> http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_99273.htm
>
> If you don't have anti-virus get it, if you have it keep it up to date.
> NEVER open anything you are not expecting!
>
>

Or you could all just buy Macs and not have to worry about viruses!!

--
Greg Cook
http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine

(remove spamblocker from my email address)

"Greg Cook" > wrote:

> Or you could all just buy Macs and not have to worry about viruses!!

Macintosh (and Linux) are just as vulnerable as are PC's (and Windoze).

Symantec started out selling an antivirus program for the Mac, before they
bought Peter Norton's company, and started marketing the same program as
"Norton Antivirus".

The first worm attack was against a Linux network.

PC's with Windoze just get hit more often, because they have so many more
users. Virus writers target them, because they get "more bang for their
buck".

Greg Cook wrote:

> Or you could all just buy Macs and not have to worry about viruses!!

Then windows would become the new mac and be safe and secure since it
would be a relatively small and obscure market :P

--
charles

"Once ... in the wilds of Afghanistan, I lost my corkscrew, and we were
forced to live on nothing but food and water for days."
- W.C. Fields

In article >,
Charles H > wrote:

> Greg Cook wrote:
>
> > Or you could all just buy Macs and not have to worry about viruses!!
>
> Then windows would become the new mac and be safe and secure since it
> would be a relatively small and obscure market :P

Oh, I dont' know about that. There was just an interesting article on
this topic that indicates linux and unix (Mac OS X) would still be safer
than windows. See the following . . .

http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/188

--
Greg Cook
http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine

(remove spamblocker from my email address)

In article >,
"Negodki" > wrote:

> "Greg Cook" > wrote:
>
> > Or you could all just buy Macs and not have to worry about viruses!!
>
> Macintosh (and Linux) are just as vulnerable as are PC's (and Windoze).
>
> Symantec started out selling an antivirus program for the Mac, before they
> bought Peter Norton's company, and started marketing the same program as
> "Norton Antivirus".
>
> The first worm attack was against a Linux network.
>
> PC's with Windoze just get hit more often, because they have so many more
> users. Virus writers target them, because they get "more bang for their
> buck".
>
>
>

All I can say is I have been using macs for more than 10 years. It has
been at least 7 years since I have had a virus. Also, there is an
interesting article on this topic which gives some insight as to why
linux and mac os x would still be safer.

http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/188

--
Greg Cook
http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine

(remove spamblocker from my email address)

Greg Cook wrote:

> Oh, I dont' know about that. There was just an interesting article on
> this topic that indicates linux and unix (Mac OS X) would still be safer
> than windows. See the following . . .

I think virus writers would step up to the challenge. I agree that both
Mac and 'nix are more secure platforms, both due to the design but also
that most users are more educated. I'd use 'em if I could, but work
demands windows.

--
charles

"Once ... in the wilds of Afghanistan, I lost my corkscrew, and we were
forced to live on nothing but food and water for days."
- W.C. Fields

"Greg Cook" > wrote :

> Oh, I dont' know about that. There was just an interesting article on
> this topic that indicates linux and unix (Mac OS X) would still be safer
> than windows. See the following . . .

Anything would be safer than windoze, but 10,000 holes to exploit is no
different from 10,000,000 in pragmatic terms. Anyone with a bit of talent,
and a very mean disposition and warped sense of humor, can write a virus to
disable any networked computer, regardless of the OS, AV, and other security
precautions. The sad thing is that one of our Islamic "friends" may soon
exploit this reality. There have been numerous recent "field tests".

"Greg Cook" > wrote:

> All I can say is I have been using macs for more than 10 years. It has
> been at least 7 years since I have had a virus. Also, there is an
> interesting article on this topic which gives some insight as to why
> linux and mac os x would still be safer.
>
> http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/188

Well, I'm certainly not going to write one and send it to you to prove you
wrong.

I read a recent article (the link was posted on one of the newsgroups),
which discussed the vulnerabilities of Linux and Mac, and the fact that MIS
managers of those installations were starting to worry, as some of their
vulnerabilities have been recently exploited. Of course, I can't locate the
article today.

Remember, "we" all assumed we were safe from terrorist attack until 9/11.
Except for a few doomsday prophets, no one (including the DOD) believed such
an attack possible. It was, and still is ridiculously easy to pull off.

Something else to consider. Who is really writing all these viruses? The
penalty for getting caught (and the source _can_ be traced if the government
wishes to invest the resources to do so) is substantial, and there is no
(monetary) reward. So who (but a fool) would take such a chance for so
little reward? It has been suggested that the only ones who profit from the
proliferation of viruses are the anti-virus software companies --- who just
coincidentally have labs where they developed new strains (purportedly to
design methods of protection from them should someone malicious get the same
idea). Makes you think....