Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs
From: Daniel Mewes (danielmewes_at_web.de)
Date: 10/01/04
- Previous message: Daniel Mewes: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- In reply to: Bill Unruh: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- Next in thread: Jim Richardson: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- Reply: Jim Richardson: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- Reply: NeoSadist: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 06:28:10 +0200
Bill Unruh wrote:
> Could malware be written for linux? Of course. No one will dispute that.
> Could it be written so as to spoof the user into being root. Yes, but
> usually root users are also more knowledgable than the general user.
Not on home computers where user and root are equal.
> ]systems. Many things could be made "better" and more tricky with a binary
> ]virus, but the script shows how easy it actually is to code a *nux virus
> ]using login spoofing (do not forget that it contains a remove routine
> which ]makes it bigger).
>
> ???? So what. What are you trying to demonstrate?
That login spoofing is nothing too hard to implement but can be done with
just a few lines of shell code and so there is no reason why other real
viruses should not use it.
> ]#You are NOT allowed to modify or redistribute this!
>
> uh, you just distributed it.
I wrote you, not me ;-)
Regards,
Daniel Mewes
- Previous message: Daniel Mewes: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- In reply to: Bill Unruh: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- Next in thread: Jim Richardson: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- Reply: Jim Richardson: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- Reply: NeoSadist: "Re: Unix NOT secure against Viruses on home PCs"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|