Ok, me again...
-----Original Message-----
From: Conrad Wei-Li Song <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, July 27, 1998 8:28 AM
Subject: Re: Win32/CIH.... where?!?!?
>and see if you see any other virus scanner than Dr. Solomon's mentioned.
I dont know why you are so against ACITS for mentioning Dr Solomon's. It
doesnt make any real sense. I admit, they could have mentioned other virus
checking software, but they did all that should be required. I dont blame
them for only checking to see if one virus checker works, there was limited
time. Also, the fact that they include it on UTConnect for a fee seems to
bother people. Most ppl dont realize that just because you can download
free programs of the web doesnt mean they are free to distribute. Most
companies charge outrages prices just to include something on a CD even if
its freely available elsewhere.
>If there are other scanners which can check for the virus, why were the
names
>of these scanners not made public?
There are some. But if someone really is concerned they can look it up.
You obviously did.
The fact that 98% of their customers will ask about Dr Solomons is the most
likely reason (I wont speculate too far). Remember that they serve UT
Faculty /Staff and many labs as well, and most of those have UTconnect
licenses.
Most of them immediately ask about Dr Solomon's (I know that from
experience).
>
>> > ....it seems highly unlikely that all of the SMF computers
>> > could acquire the virus within the period of a month....
No, it is VERY likely. They all boot off an image(unless they changed it
recently, i doubt it though). If that image is corrupted, they all are.
>from a network drive. Perhaps someone working in the SMF implanted the
virus?
>This would at least explain the 100% distribution rate on SMF computers.
Possibly planted, most likely installed unknowningly. The ditribution rate
would always be ~100% if its on the image.
>that protocols were breached or poorly defined.
I have never been very impressed with SMF protocol of using the server
machines, nor LabMan software... well i take that back, Im impressed that
its stays up so long without crashing (at least the 95 version). But, the
virus was rather new, so it could easily been installed
Of course, the smf turnover ration is quite high in all but 3 jobs or so.
:(
Well thats enough for now,
I guess ill get back to my work (and this can go back to Linux after a reply or too).
Dave
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Send administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
