There is a new virus. The code name is WORK. If you receive WORK from your colleagues, your boss, via e-mail, or from anyone else, do not touch it under any circumstances. This virus wipes out your private life completely.
If you should happen to come in contact with this virus, take two friends and go straight to the nearest bar. Order drinks immediately and after three rounds, you will find that WORK has been completely deleted from your system.
Forward this virus warning immediately to at least five friends. Should you realize you do not have five friends, this means you are already infected by this virus and WORK already controls your life. If this is the case, go to the bar and stay until you make at least five friends.
Then retry.
I think I have five friends, but am not entirely positive, so I'm headed for the bar anyway . . . it never hurts to be safe. -- Cheers! Rich
> There is a new virus. The code name is WORK. If you receive WORK from > your colleagues, your boss, via e-mail, or from anyone else, do not touch > it under any circumstances. This virus wipes out your private life > completely.
> If you should happen to come in contact with this virus, take two friends > and go straight to the nearest bar. Order drinks immediately and after > three rounds, you will find that WORK has been completely deleted from > your system.
> Forward this virus warning immediately to at least five friends. Should > you realize you do not have five friends, this means you are already > infected by this virus and WORK already controls your life. If this is > the case, go to the bar and stay until you make at least five friends.
> Then retry.
> I think I have five friends, but am not entirely positive, so I'm headed > for the bar anyway . . . it never hurts to be safe. > -- > Cheers! > Rich
Rich Grise is the last person on earth that has to worry about being infected by "Work". On the other hand, the "Screw off and bug the shit out of people" virus hit him years ago.
On Tue, 10 May 2005 06:31:13 +0000, Michael A. Terrell wrote: > Genome wrote:
>> God Damn you idiot!
>> Are you outing the Work virus?
>> Where's your permit?
>> This could become just slightly pernicious.
>> Where is our Woodgate now?
>> All is lost.
>> DNA
> Rich Grise is the last person on earth that has to worry about being > infected by "Work". On the other hand, the "Screw off and bug the shit > out of people" virus hit him years ago.
Oh, come on, Michael. Are you joining the "J.T. & I Hate Rich Grise" fan club?
Actually, that one fellow has been quite civil since I read him the riot act.
(and, just FYI, the post that Genome responded to, which you've conveniently snipped, was a _JOKE_. Sheesh!)
Thanks, Rich
[and if anybody wants to rag on me for getting personal, I have a very convenient safety exit - I have a sister named Jean Torgeson, who hates me with more venom than I knew it was possible for one human to spew. :-) ]
> There is a new virus. The code name is WORK. If you receive WORK from > your colleagues, your boss, via e-mail, or from anyone else, do not touch > it under any circumstances. This virus wipes out your private life > completely.
> If you should happen to come in contact with this virus, take two friends > and go straight to the nearest bar. Order drinks immediately and after > three rounds, you will find that WORK has been completely deleted from > your system.
> Forward this virus warning immediately to at least five friends. Should > you realize you do not have five friends, this means you are already > infected by this virus and WORK already controls your life. If this is > the case, go to the bar and stay until you make at least five friends.
> Then retry.
> I think I have five friends, but am not entirely positive, so I'm headed > for the bar anyway . . . it never hurts to be safe. > -- > Cheers! > Rich
>I just got a new one in an email a couple days ago, seemed to be fairly >new. It was called sober. > Luckily I keep my Norton 2005 up to date.
Duh. That only protects you against viruses they already know about. If you happen to be one of the "lucky" ones who get the virus first, no anti-virus software will effectively stop them 100%.
The best protection is to practice safe internetting, and use a firewall. Hardware appliances provide more robust protection than software-only firewalls. And don't forget that even the best firewalls are targets of hacking.
Your final and most effective protection is regular and correctly protected backups. Implementing a "double grandfather" system, and using common sense about when and how to drop back is the best protection.
> "Walter" <l.jinri...@mchsi.com> wrote in message > news:MDnge.74149$WI3.58755@attbi_s71... > >I just got a new one in an email a couple days ago, seemed to be fairly > >new. It was called sober. > > Luckily I keep my Norton 2005 up to date.
> Duh. That only protects you against viruses they already know about. If > you happen to be one of the "lucky" ones who get the virus first, no > anti-virus software will effectively stop them 100%.
> The best protection is to practice safe internetting, and use a firewall. > Hardware appliances provide more robust protection than software-only > firewalls. And don't forget that even the best firewalls are targets of > hacking.
> Your final and most effective protection is regular and correctly protected > backups. Implementing a "double grandfather" system, and using common sense > about when and how to drop back is the best protection.
> LLoyd
Hmmm. Much of what you said isn't true at all. First of all, virus protection software protects against malicious code being executed. Old virus scanners would search files for a snippit (a unique signature) of code and compare it to a database of known virus code. Modern scanners will prohibit code of a questionable nature (for example non-OOP-based polymorphism, modification of executable files by a third party program upon running them, etc.). Hence virus scanners most definitely do protect you against unknown virii.
As for your firewalls, hardware firewalls ARE NOT more robust than software firewalls. Hardware firewalls have processors just like those in our every day computers, except slower. I have been a network administrator for a long time and always program Linux routers for use as comprehensive firewalls because they are much more powerful and robust than hardware alternatives like Cisco. Now, if you are talking about windows based firewalls, that's a different story (-: Kernel based firewalls on UNIX systems are far more powerful than Cisco (and other) appliances because you can install them on faster platforms and modify their code to more intimately suit your needs. It really pisses me off how Cisco has brainwashed everyone into thinking that hardware appliances do something unique. I've replaced hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of Cisco equipment with old 486 and Pentium machines that not only out-perform the hardware appliances, but have more powerful features. Not to mention when your hardware appliance breaks you can't simply take the hard drive out and put it into a new one (-:
A firewall is not going to protect you from malicious code (IE a virus). Firewalls simply filter all packets passing through them. They can choose what to do with packets from a whole bunch of options, they can drop, deny, allow, forward, etc. End users do not need firewalls, they serve them absolutely no purpose. People who host services on the Internet need firewalls because they need to be able to control things like allowing FTP access on their local network but denying it publicly. If all of your ports are closed on your system (IE you aren't running any internet servers) you are not susceptible to attack. I suspect that the reason end users think that they need firewalls is because companies making silly end user firewalls like Norton security and zone alarm have convinced people that their software is useful.
Your best defense as an end user is to make sure all your ports are closed (scan.sygate.com/quickscan.html), run a good up to date virus protection program like Norton, and to listen to Lloyd and practice safe sensible internetting.
> Hmmm. Much of what you said isn't true at all. First of all, virus > protection software protects against malicious code being executed. Old > virus scanners would search files for a snippit (a unique signature) of > code and compare it to a database of known virus code. Modern scanners > will prohibit code of a questionable nature (for example non-OOP-based > polymorphism, modification of executable files by a third party program > upon running them, etc.). Hence virus scanners most definitely do protect > you against unknown virii.
Just like McAfee protected against those eight or nine consecutive virii that attacked McAfee specifically? Mmmmm?
> As for your firewalls, hardware firewalls ARE NOT more robust than > software firewalls. Hardware firewalls have processors just like those in > our every day computers, except slower. I have been a network > administrator > for a long time and always program Linux routers for use as comprehensive > firewalls because they are much more powerful and robust than hardware > alternatives like Cisco.
You're talking about a hardware appliance when you dedicate a machine to firewall duty, now, aren't you? I've written kernel code for Slackware, Redhat, FreeBSD, SCO, AIX, and Cromix. I know of what you speak. But a computer dedicated to the specific function of being a firewall is a hardware firewall -- doesn't matter a bit what kind of paint they put on the box.
Now, if you are talking about windows based
> firewalls, that's a different story
I was... that's what most non-computing types think of as "software firewalls".
(-: Kernel based firewalls on UNIX
> systems are far more powerful than Cisco (and other) appliances because > you can install them on faster platforms and modify their code to more > intimately suit your needs. It really pisses me off how Cisco has > brainwashed everyone into thinking that hardware appliances do something > unique. I've replaced hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of Cisco > equipment with old 486 and Pentium machines that not only out-perform the > hardware appliances, but have more powerful features. Not to mention when > your hardware appliance breaks you can't simply take the hard drive out > and put it into a new one (-:'
No disagreement, there.
> A firewall is not going to protect you from malicious code (IE a virus). > Firewalls simply filter all packets passing through them. They can choose > what to do with packets from a whole bunch of options, they can drop, > deny, allow, forward, etc. End users do not need firewalls, they serve > them absolutely no purpose. People who host services on the Internet need > firewalls because they need to be able to control things like allowing FTP > access on their local network but denying it publicly. If all of your > ports are closed on your system (IE you aren't running any internet > servers) you are not susceptible to attack. I suspect that the reason end > users think that they need firewalls is because companies making silly end > user firewalls like Norton security and zone alarm have convinced people > that their software is useful.
But with authentication and adequate spoofing, they make your network almost invisible to the outside world. With additional "front-end" virus checking, they do a better job than desktop regnant virus checkers that scan only after the code is in your machine. But I agree that even the best aren't impervious. A new IPsec vulnerability just showed up around netville this week that allows DES encrypted, but un-authenticated VPN tunnels to be compromised by an intermediate routing node.
> Your best defense as an end user is to make sure all your ports are closed > (scan.sygate.com/quickscan.html), run a good up to date virus protection > program like Norton, and to listen to Lloyd and practice safe sensible > internetting.
AND...rotate your most recent backups off-premises.
> > Hmmm. Much of what you said isn't true at all. First of all, virus > > protection software protects against malicious code being executed. Old > > virus scanners would search files for a snippit (a unique signature) of > > code and compare it to a database of known virus code. Modern scanners > > will prohibit code of a questionable nature (for example non-OOP-based > > polymorphism, modification of executable files by a third party program > > upon running them, etc.). Hence virus scanners most definitely do protect > > you against unknown virii.
> Just like McAfee protected against those eight or nine consecutive virii > that attacked McAfee specifically? Mmmmm?
> > As for your firewalls, hardware firewalls ARE NOT more robust than > > software firewalls. Hardware firewalls have processors just like those in > > our every day computers, except slower. I have been a network > > administrator > > for a long time and always program Linux routers for use as comprehensive > > firewalls because they are much more powerful and robust than hardware > > alternatives like Cisco.
> You're talking about a hardware appliance when you dedicate a machine to > firewall duty, now, aren't you? I've written kernel code for Slackware, > Redhat, FreeBSD, SCO, AIX, and Cromix. I know of what you speak. But a > computer dedicated to the specific function of being a firewall is a > hardware firewall -- doesn't matter a bit what kind of paint they put on the > box.
I guess that is really open to interpretation.
<snipped for brevity>
> AND...rotate your most recent backups off-premises.
> LLoyd
We're pretty much on the same page then (-; What kind of kernel code have you written?
> Your best defense as an end user is to make sure all your ports are closed > (scan.sygate.com/quickscan.html), run a good up to date virus protection > program like Norton, and to listen to Lloyd and practice safe sensible > internetting.
Hopeless newb questions:
I use Norton and ZoneAlarm, and as you can see connect through Cox.net. I went to the recommended site and everything returned "BLOCKED". Was that because my software works, or because Cox does all the heavy lifting?
> We're pretty much on the same page then (-; What kind of kernel code have > you written?
Mostly drivers. I was heavily into augmenting hardware support on AIX (for our own proprietary hardware) when I, uh, "retired" from the computer business.
> > We're pretty much on the same page then (-; What kind of kernel code have > > you written?
> Mostly drivers. I was heavily into augmenting hardware support on AIX (for > our own proprietary hardware) when I, uh, "retired" from the computer > business.
> LLoyd
What kind of hardware? I'm always interested in meeting fellow UNIX enthusiasts (-:
On Thu, 12 May 2005, Mark Fergerson wrote: > Sir Jackery wrote:
> <snip>
> > Your best defense as an end user is to make sure all your ports are closed > > (scan.sygate.com/quickscan.html), run a good up to date virus protection > > program like Norton, and to listen to Lloyd and practice safe sensible > > internetting.
> Hopeless newb questions:
> I use Norton and ZoneAlarm, and as you can see connect through > Cox.net. I went to the recommended site and everything returned > "BLOCKED". Was that because my software works, or because Cox does > all the heavy lifting?
> Mark L. Fergerson
Could be either or. A lot of times cable/dsl users connect through a router that denies all incoming access to the lower port range. Try turning off your software firewall and see if they are still blocked (-:
>> Mostly drivers. I was heavily into augmenting hardware support on AIX >> (for >> our own proprietary hardware) when I, uh, "retired" from the computer >> business.
>> LLoyd
> What kind of hardware? I'm always interested in meeting fellow UNIX > enthusiasts (-:
Most of my career was spent designing proprietary interfaces for "oddball" printers (like the GE Terminet series) and SDLC/HDLC/BiSYNC communications controllers.
Once we had committed financially to using those devices, and we switched from Point4 IRIS to various 'IXs, I had to develop drivers to talk to the boards.
My software origins are in writing various disk operating systems and modifying the kernel and BIOS of CP/M. This started back when the only mass storage you could buy for small computers was the old Sugart SA-801 single-sided, single-density 8" floppies (at a whopping 241K per disk).
I implemented Linux as a web server running Apache back when the only way you could get the Slackware distribution was on floppies!
> On Thu, 12 May 2005, Mark Fergerson wrote: >>Sir Jackery wrote:
>><snip>
>>>Your best defense as an end user is to make sure all your ports are closed >>>(scan.sygate.com/quickscan.html), run a good up to date virus protection >>>program like Norton, and to listen to Lloyd and practice safe sensible >>>internetting.
>> Hopeless newb questions:
>> I use Norton and ZoneAlarm, and as you can see connect through >>Cox.net. I went to the recommended site and everything returned >>"BLOCKED". Was that because my software works, or because Cox does >>all the heavy lifting? > Could be either or. A lot of times cable/dsl users connect through a > router that denies all incoming access to the lower port range.
That's roughtly what I thought I'd heard, which is why I asked.
> Try > turning off your software firewall and see if they are still blocked (-:
> "Sir Jackery" <r...@jackery.com> wrote in message > news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0505121420590.2353-100000@nocase.jackery.com... > >> Mostly drivers. I was heavily into augmenting hardware support on AIX > >> (for > >> our own proprietary hardware) when I, uh, "retired" from the computer > >> business.
> >> LLoyd
> > What kind of hardware? I'm always interested in meeting fellow UNIX > > enthusiasts (-:
> Most of my career was spent designing proprietary interfaces for "oddball" > printers (like the GE Terminet series) and SDLC/HDLC/BiSYNC communications > controllers.
> Once we had committed financially to using those devices, and we switched > from Point4 IRIS to various 'IXs, I had to develop drivers to talk to the > boards.
> My software origins are in writing various disk operating systems and > modifying the kernel and BIOS of CP/M. This started back when the only mass > storage you could buy for small computers was the old Sugart SA-801 > single-sided, single-density 8" floppies (at a whopping 241K per disk).
> I implemented Linux as a web server running Apache back when the only way > you could get the Slackware distribution was on floppies!
> Diff'r'nt world, now!
> LLoyd
I too installed slackware from floppies (-: It was my first experience with anything *NIX like. But the 8" floppies were behind my time.
Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote: > The best protection is to practice safe internetting, and use a firewall. > Hardware appliances provide more robust protection than software-only > firewalls. And don't forget that even the best firewalls are targets of > hacking.
Yup. Safe 'netting using your brains and precautions is the way to go. And use applications that ain't the targets for those zillions of attacks.
I've been on the net since 1996 and haven't been infected with a virus, ever. The only thing that strucked me was the "teardrop"-attack way back in 1997. Other than that, clean as a baby.
Anyone sending unwanted advertising e-mail to my address will be charged $250 for network traffic and computing time. By extracting address from this message or its header, you agree to these terms.
On Sat, 14 May 2005 11:04:50 +0000, Rikard Bosnjakovic wrote: > Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
>> The best protection is to practice safe internetting, and use a firewall. >> Hardware appliances provide more robust protection than software-only >> firewalls. And don't forget that even the best firewalls are targets of >> hacking.
> Yup. Safe 'netting using your brains and precautions is the way to go. And > use applications that ain't the targets for those zillions of attacks.
> I've been on the net since 1996 and haven't been infected with a virus, > ever. The only thing that strucked me was the "teardrop"-attack way back > in 1997. Other than that, clean as a baby.
You've obviously never changed a diaper. (Ewwww!) -- Cheers! Rich ------ "But they'll never mechanize me -- not me! Said Charlotte, the Louisville harlot." -- S.I. Hayakawa"
Yeah I too installed Slack for the first time that way.
I still use Slackware on all my machines, this one I am using now included. I can't stand RPM style package management, however Debian really wants me to leave Slack land! Nah I'll probably use Slack as long as it exists.
Why the hell is this cross-posted to so many groups anyway?
>>>>Mostly drivers. I was heavily into augmenting hardware support on AIX >>>>(for >>>>our own proprietary hardware) when I, uh, "retired" from the computer >>>>business.
>>>>LLoyd
>>>What kind of hardware? I'm always interested in meeting fellow UNIX >>>enthusiasts (-:
>>Most of my career was spent designing proprietary interfaces for "oddball" >>printers (like the GE Terminet series) and SDLC/HDLC/BiSYNC communications >>controllers.
>>Once we had committed financially to using those devices, and we switched >>from Point4 IRIS to various 'IXs, I had to develop drivers to talk to the >>boards.
>>My software origins are in writing various disk operating systems and >>modifying the kernel and BIOS of CP/M. This started back when the only mass >>storage you could buy for small computers was the old Sugart SA-801 >>single-sided, single-density 8" floppies (at a whopping 241K per disk).
>>I implemented Linux as a web server running Apache back when the only way >>you could get the Slackware distribution was on floppies!
>>Diff'r'nt world, now!
>>LLoyd
> I too installed slackware from floppies (-: It was my first experience > with anything *NIX like. But the 8" floppies were behind my time.
On Sun, 15 May 2005, Alan Yates wrote: > Yeah I too installed Slack for the first time that way.
> I still use Slackware on all my machines, this one I am using now > included. I can't stand RPM style package management, however Debian > really wants me to leave Slack land! Nah I'll probably use Slack as > long as it exists.
> Why the hell is this cross-posted to so many groups anyway?
rec.puzzles? (-:
Don't fall to the Debian world! And don't fall to (blech) package management. Or better yet, lets design our own package manager. I find that the best distribution is the one that is so heavily modified that it becomes your own unique distro.
On Sun, 15 May 2005 17:28:19 +0000, Alan Yates wrote: > Yeah I too installed Slack for the first time that way.
> I still use Slackware on all my machines, this one I am using now > included. I can't stand RPM style package management, however Debian > really wants me to leave Slack land! Nah I'll probably use Slack as > long as it exists.
> Why the hell is this cross-posted to so many groups anyway?
That would be my fault. The original post was supposed to be a JOKE!
Just in case your server has dropped it: ------------ Subject: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!
There is a new virus. The code name is WORK. If you receive WORK from your colleagues, your boss, via e-mail, or from anyone else, do not touch it under any circumstances. This virus wipes out your private life completely.
If you should happen to come in contact with this virus, take two friends and go straight to the nearest bar. Order drinks immediately and after three rounds, you will find that WORK has been completely deleted from your system.
Forward this virus warning immediately to at least five friends. Should you realize you do not have five friends, this means you are already infected by this virus and WORK already controls your life. If this is the case, go to the bar and stay until you make at least five friends.
Then retry.
I think I have five friends, but am not entirely positive, so I'm headed for the bar anyway . . . it never hurts to be safe. ------------- So I could say "I was only following orders". Since I don't have five friends, I posted it to five newsgroups. ;-)
On Sun, 15 May 2005 23:08:37 +0000, Sir Jackery wrote: > On Sun, 15 May 2005, Alan Yates wrote:
>> Yeah I too installed Slack for the first time that way.
>> I still use Slackware on all my machines, this one I am using now >> included. I can't stand RPM style package management, however Debian >> really wants me to leave Slack land! Nah I'll probably use Slack as >> long as it exists.
>> Why the hell is this cross-posted to so many groups anyway?
> rec.puzzles? (-:
> Don't fall to the Debian world! And don't fall to (blech) package > management. Or better yet, lets design our own package manager. I find > that the best distribution is the one that is so heavily modified that it > becomes your own unique distro.
There are Linux users (like me) who believe that the responsibility for "Package Management" and "Dependency Checking" lie with the the Sys Admin, not with the new software. :-)
I'm using Slack 10.0, but my first time, I actually downloaded the whole thing. It only took a couple of days at 56K. :-) It was 2.something, as I remember.
