John Rudd wrote: > Joe Sloan wrote: >> John Rudd wrote: >>> Dennis Peterson wrote: >>>> And to follow up on the earlier >>>> point about Windows systems not being the sole source of spam/virus >>>> distribution, >>> The idea that any platform (windows, unix/linux, etc.) attached to the >>> net cannot be subverted into being a spam/virus zombie is, at best, >>> naive. And a naive sysadmin is a danger to us all. >> I don't think anybody on this list has ever said windows can't be >> subverted. The swarms of compromised xp boxes that are rented out in >> blocks of 1000 or 10000 for sending spam are proof enough of that. > > From reading the quotes, someone was suggesting that they're immune to > compromises because they're not running windows. That statement is > covered by my assertion of "that idea is naive".
I don't think they said they were immune to compromises, but that there was no compelling case for the added expense of virus scanning all outgoing mail in a non-windows environment. Joe _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
