I am constantly amazed at posts like this where you make yourself sound like
some sort of statistical genius because you were able to predict that since
last year was %243, that this year would be %243. Wow. Really?
And for the record, these claims of 'inherent insecurity' in Windows are
On Sat, 15 May 2010 14:40:29 +
Thor (Hammer of God) t...@hammerofgod.com wrote:
And for the record, these claims of 'inherent insecurity' in Windows
are simply ignorant. If you are still running Windows 95 that's your
problem. Do a little research before post assertions based on 10 or
That kind of goes for everything, doesn't it?
T
On May 15, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Peter Besenbruch p...@lava.net wrote:
On Sat, 15 May 2010 14:40:29 +
Thor (Hammer of God) t...@hammerofgod.com wrote:
And for the record, these claims of 'inherent insecurity' in Windows
are simply
On 5/14/2010 6:19 AM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Dear Marsh,
Personal opinions (hoping not to start a flame war) on your questions:
Thanks.
A. Does anyone think there would be much gained by me requesting (or
insisting on) a CVE number?
I do not see the need for CVEs for such
Is that you, Bill?
I think you misunderstand. 9 months ago, I measured the growth rate
at 243%, using Symantec's stats. 9 months ago I posted that number
here, together with a prediction of this year's stats. Recently, I
got this year's stats and compared them with that prediction. I
An interesting point - Unicode?
I don't think 5Mb files are infeasible, especially as time passes,
that'll be just a blip before long.
Stu
On 15 May 2010 at 14:59, Christian Sciberras wrote:
Date sent: Sat, 15 May 2010 14:59:46 +0100
Subject:Re: [Full-disclosure] Windows'
My main reason for claiming that Windows is inherently insecure is
because it's closed source.
As opposed to crowd sourcing, which some claim is inherently more
secure because more [uneducated] eyes review the source code? This is
along the lines of, 'Linux does not get viruses' argument. Give
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Thor (Hammer of God)
t...@hammerofgod.com wrote:
I am constantly amazed at posts like this where you make yourself sound like
some sort of statistical genius because you were able to predict that since
last year was %243, that this year would be %243. Wow.
No, It's Tim Mullen. No Bill here.
No, I don't misunderstand: You said You may recall that last year, the
average annual growth rate of new threats (as defined by Symantec) was 243%.
This enabled me to predict that the number of new threats in this year's
Symantec Threat Report would be
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:
As opposed to crowd sourcing, which some claim is inherently more
secure because more [uneducated] eyes review the source code?
There are far more educated eyes able to review the Linux source code
than the Windows source
And what of the pass the hash group of attacks, not to mention the
insecure hashing to begin with? Combine that with token manipulation
and process migration and you have a very deadly combination to almost
any windows network that you don't see anywhere else. Exploiting
windows networks
Sent from my HTC Touch Pro2 on the Now Network from Sprint®.
-Original Message-
From: BMF badmotherfs...@gmail.com
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2010 4:54 PM
To: full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Windows' future (reprise)
On
On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:22:26 -0400
Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:
This is
along the lines of, 'Linux does not get viruses' argument. Give me a
break...
I set up a dual boot arrangement on a friend's machine. The Windows
side promptly got infected. The guy was furious and blamed his
IOW, you took what Symantec's numbers were for one year, and guessed
they would be the same for this year, and then posted how you were
almost right.
You definitely misunderstand. AFAIK, Symantec do not publish the
number 243%. I calculated it myself, using this sum:
(0.92 + 3.67 + 1.64 +
This just gets better all the time. I have to admit, it was fun at first, but
now's I grow weary, mostly because this is just sad.
For you to actually think that one can't find out how much free drive space in
Windows would be funny it were not so ridiculous. And it's been built into DIR
On 16 May 2010, at 04:06, Thor (Hammer of God) wrote:
Oh, one last thing - your dear Pegasus 4.51 Windows-based program that you
hypocritically hold on to while demonizing Windows and .NET was... wait for
it wait for it written with Visual Studio 2008 C++ - a proud
Microsoft
Hi Bill!
Thanks for the tip on the DIR command, I did in fact notice that,
however it doesn't give percentages (or total space), AFAIK, and my
monitoring bot wants percentages. My df also reports the computer
name (so I can make sense of the output when the space on multiple
machines is
17 matches
Mail list logo
