On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Chuck Yerkes wrote:
> If we're here to say "far better" then don't use clients that
> run code.
Agreed.
My experience is that the virus code targets windows/outlook because
it's easy.
In the past, viruses have also attacked various AV packages -
predominantly the targetted packages are McAfee and Norton because of
their high advertising profiles.
It's better to use 2 sets of AV software for scanning in any case
> If you pull down a virus via POP, there is no danger.
> Until you run it. I've been using Mutt and Evolution. I have
> no virus danger. They won't run stuff. Oh, even if they did,
> it won't have much luck on BSD.
Until someone comes along with a virus for $OS_FLAVOUR.
> So lets keep this in context:
> The viruses are Outlook viruses, generally on Windows. The problem
> is terrifically clear. The solutions usually just address the symptom
> of the problem.
Unfortunately, it's impossible to force people to switch away from
Windows. Let's be honest, 99% of people would be better off running a
Mac. (and no, I don't own one).
We(*) ask our kids things like "If johnny {played in the middle of the
busy street|jumped off a cliff} would you do it too?, while forgetting
that for the most part that's exactly what we're doing, computerwise, as
a society. It's quite depressing how an unreliable OS has trained people
to expect that technology blows up all the time.
(*) There is no "we"
