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
You call it a blip yet you are counting in infections for *everywhere* and
*anyone* so, what makes you think service providers (which have been comfy
in
The error in your overall thesis is your failure to identify the difference
between threat and risk. You are interacting with Symantec's report of x new
threats as if it actually means something, or more specifically, that these
new threats somehow translate into some new level of risk. They
Hello participants of Full-Disclosure.
Last year I already wrote about vulnerabilities in bots of search engines in
my articles URL Spoofing vulnerability in bots of search engines
(http://www.webappsec.org/lists/websecurity/archive/2009-04/msg00047.html)
and URL Spoofing vulnerability in bots of
Dear Colleagues,
Please find attached the Call for Papers for EC2ND 2010, the
sixth European Conference on Computer Network Defense, which will
be held in Berlin, Germany, October 28-29, 2010.
Please feel free to distribute this announcement. We apologize if
you receive multiple copies of
Hello Full-Disclosure!
I want to warn you about security vulnerability in module 3D user cloud for
Joomla.
-
Advisory: Vulnerability in 3D user cloud for Joomla
-
URL: http://websecurity.com.ua/4198/
-
Affected
Imagine you are in an enclosed space. It starts to flood. As the
water level rises, the amount of oxygen you have available falls.
Unless it stops flooding, eventually you will have no oxygen at all.
So, the CPU, RAM, diskspace, and network bandwidth of your machine,
as well as limits
On Sun, 16 May 2010 23:49:00 BST, lsi said:
Malware is flooding at 243% (+/- error). This is consuming the
oxygen in your machine.
The basic error in your analysis is that although there may in fact be
243% more malware samples, that doesn't translate into 243% more oxygen
consumption.
On 17 May 2010 at 1:06, Christian Sciberras wrote:
Malware is not flooding. It only s much as changes and not at an
alarming rate neither.
It is mutating at approx 243% per annum, a rate which is more than
twice as fast as Moore's Law (200% every 24 months). I do find this
alarming, because
On Mon, 17 May 2010 03:48:36 BST, lsi said:
It is mutating at approx 243% per annum, a rate which is more than
twice as fast as Moore's Law (200% every 24 months). I do find this
alarming, because I want my CPU back. So does everyone else I know.
Unfortunately, you haven't shown that the
