OT mcloughlin-david-no@-spam.btconnect.com you have a virus

David,

As a reader of this newsgroup - please remove your virus - you are killing
my inbox.

/F

Danny Burchett <me@privacy.net> wrote:

> People without up to date AV should not be allowed on the internet. That
> would soon solve the problem.

Erm... probably because you wouldn't have much of an Internet left. Banning
all those Unix and Linux servers which underpin the Internet because they
don't have AV on them is a bit extreme

Danny Burchett wrote:

> People without up to date AV should not be allowed on the internet. That
> would soon solve the problem.

Don't run AV here at all!
>
> Danny
> The box said windows 98 or better, so I installed Linux
This is why.
--
del 8-)

Nick Bown wrote:

> Danny Burchett <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> People without up to date AV should not be allowed on the internet. That
>> would soon solve the problem.
>
> Erm... probably because you wouldn't have much of an Internet left.
> Banning all those Unix and Linux servers which underpin the Internet
> because they don't have AV on them is a bit extreme

Hmmm... point made, can we agree on banning all windows machines ;)

Danny

--
The box said windows 98 or better, so I installed Linux

Header is false, correct is Danny at danshome dot org

del <$/$new$/$@foodel.org.uk> wrote:

> Don't run AV here at all!
>> The box said windows 98 or better, so I installed Linux

> This is why.

So now would be a bad time to point out that there are more known "viruses" (ie.
worms, bombs, etc.) for Linux than MacOS or any commercial version of Unix then?

Nick
"I remember when all this was just unallocated memory"

"Nick Bown" <nbown@nospamthanks.ixcg.com> wrote in message
news:3f8680ef$0$10956$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk

> del <$/$new$/$@foodel.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Don't run AV here at all!
> >> The box said windows 98 or better, so I installed Linux
>
> > This is why.
>
> So now would be a bad time to point out that there are more known "viruses" (ie.
> worms, bombs, etc.) for Linux than MacOS or any commercial version of Unix then?
>
> Nick
> "I remember when all this was just unallocated memory"

He He he.......

"There are about 60,000 viruses known for Windows, 40 or so for the
Macintosh
, about 5 for commercial Unix versions, and perhaps 40 for Linux.

Source:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/56/33226.html

The article's worth a read!

daveA




--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Nick Bown wrote:

> del <$/$new$/$@foodel.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> Don't run AV here at all!
>>> The box said windows 98 or better, so I installed Linux
>
>> This is why.
>
> So now would be a bad time to point out that there are more known
> "viruses" (ie. worms, bombs, etc.) for Linux than MacOS or any commercial
> version of Unix then?
>
> Nick
> "I remember when all this was just unallocated memory"

Doesn't matter, they all need to be executed by a user! None of them open
and run automatically like a windows virus.

Look at this
<URL:http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/56/33226.html> and have a look at
the pdf that's linked on the page as well.
--
del 8-)

Danny Burchett wrote:
> Nick Bown wrote:
>> Danny Burchett wrote:
>>
>>> People without up to date AV should not be allowed on the internet.
>>> That would soon solve the problem.
>>
>> Erm... probably because you wouldn't have much of an Internet left.
>> Banning all those Unix and Linux servers which underpin the Internet
>> because they don't have AV on them is a bit extreme
>
> Hmmm... point made, can we agree on banning all windows machines ;)

Who do you think pay for the internet?
All those millions of windows boxes. The
ISPs need lots of them to pay the bill
for a big fat line.

The average non-windows box on the web (if you
can talk about something so rare as 'average')
is jacked into some academic hub and running
free.

nigelH

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:08:28 +0000, Dave Appleby wrote:


> "There are about 60,000 viruses known for Windows, 40 or so for the
> Macintosh, about 5 for commercial Unix versions, and perhaps 40 for
> Linux.

You left out the next line:

"Two or three of the Macintosh viruses were widespread enough to be of
importance. None of the Unix or Linux viruses became widespread - most
were confined to the laboratory."

Apparently 28% of UK computer users got a virus last year.

Jason

--
http://www.scuba-addict.co.uk/ for Aussie diving reports including
Cape Tribulation, Cairns, Airlie Beach, Exmouth and the HMAS Swan

Jason <jason.usenet.nospam@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> You left out the next line:

> "Two or three of the Macintosh viruses were widespread enough to be of
> importance. None of the Unix or Linux viruses became widespread - most
> were confined to the laboratory."

The article is a little inaccurate in several respects; the number
of Linux viruses there are out there and no major problems. Several
worms such as Lion and Slapper caused major headaches and had companies
scrambling for fixes.

> Apparently 28% of UK computer users got a virus last year.

I had glandular fever... does that count?