Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
7 views
Skip to first unread message
~BD~
Mar 23, 2013, 2:42:49 PM3/23/13
to
How easy is it to take over hundreds of thousands of computers, and
enslave them in a botnet that could be used by hackers for malicious
purposes? Not so hard, it turns out. Last year, an anonymous researcher
created software of the type used by hackers, and within one day,
created a botnet of over 400,000 computers. He kept the botnet alive for
four months, and nobody noticed. Here's what you need to know about
botnets...
Read more:
http://askbobrankin.com/botnet_alert_are_you_vulnerable.html#ixzz2OOEDZcvj
--
enslave them in a botnet that could be used by hackers for malicious
purposes? Not so hard, it turns out. Last year, an anonymous researcher
created software of the type used by hackers, and within one day,
created a botnet of over 400,000 computers. He kept the botnet alive for
four months, and nobody noticed. Here's what you need to know about
botnets...
Read more:
http://askbobrankin.com/botnet_alert_are_you_vulnerable.html#ixzz2OOEDZcvj
--
Aardvark
Mar 23, 2013, 2:48:12 PM3/23/13
to
On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 18:42:49 +0000, the lying, slimy, cowardly cunt wrote:
> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
Nope.
Next question, cunt.
--
"I grabbed a pile of dust, and holding it up, foolishly asked for as many
birthdays as the grains of dust, I forgot to ask that they be years of
youth. "
-Ovid (Publius Ovidius Naso (20 March 43 BC – AD 17/18))
> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
Nope.
Next question, cunt.
--
"I grabbed a pile of dust, and holding it up, foolishly asked for as many
birthdays as the grains of dust, I forgot to ask that they be years of
youth. "
-Ovid (Publius Ovidius Naso (20 March 43 BC – AD 17/18))
Virus Guy
Mar 23, 2013, 3:39:02 PM3/23/13
to
~BD~ wrote:
> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
No - because I run Windows 98.
> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
Next question?
Message has been deleted
FrozenNorth
Mar 25, 2013, 6:23:30 PM3/25/13
to
On 3/25/2013 5:55 PM, Dustin wrote:
> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
> huh? Why is win98 immune to a botnet, exactly?
>
While not immune, probably safer than XP and newer, only because nobody
is going to bother with the few boxes still running the antique.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
>
While not immune, probably safer than XP and newer, only because nobody
is going to bother with the few boxes still running the antique.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
The Daring Dufas
Mar 25, 2013, 8:49:31 PM3/25/13
to
On 3/25/2013 4:23 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
> On 3/25/2013 5:55 PM, Dustin wrote:
>> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
>>
>>> ~BD~ wrote:
>>>
>>>> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
>>>
>>> No - because I run Windows 98.
>>>
>>> Next question?
>>>
>>
>> huh? Why is win98 immune to a botnet, exactly?
>>
> While not immune, probably safer than XP and newer, only because nobody
> is going to bother with the few boxes still running the antique.
>
Does this mean my IBM 360/50 running Fortran is safe? o_O
> On 3/25/2013 5:55 PM, Dustin wrote:
>> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
>>
>>> ~BD~ wrote:
>>>
>>>> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
>>>
>>> No - because I run Windows 98.
>>>
>>> Next question?
>>>
>>
>> huh? Why is win98 immune to a botnet, exactly?
>>
> While not immune, probably safer than XP and newer, only because nobody
> is going to bother with the few boxes still running the antique.
>
TDD
FrozenNorth
Mar 25, 2013, 7:55:50 PM3/25/13
to
The Daring Dufas
Mar 25, 2013, 9:08:36 PM3/25/13
to
On 3/25/2013 5:55 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
> On 3/25/2013 8:49 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
>> On 3/25/2013 4:23 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
>>> On 3/25/2013 5:55 PM, Dustin wrote:
>>>> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
>>>>
>>>>> ~BD~ wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
>>>>>
>>>>> No - because I run Windows 98.
>>>>>
>>>>> Next question?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> huh? Why is win98 immune to a botnet, exactly?
>>>>
>>> While not immune, probably safer than XP and newer, only because nobody
>>> is going to bother with the few boxes still running the antique.
>>>
>>
>> Does this mean my IBM 360/50 running Fortran is safe? o_O
>>
> A qualified maybe, I know my CP/M machine is safe. :-)
>
The damn punch cards are a real bitch to work with. ^_^
> On 3/25/2013 8:49 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
>> On 3/25/2013 4:23 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
>>> On 3/25/2013 5:55 PM, Dustin wrote:
>>>> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
>>>>
>>>>> ~BD~ wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
>>>>>
>>>>> No - because I run Windows 98.
>>>>>
>>>>> Next question?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> huh? Why is win98 immune to a botnet, exactly?
>>>>
>>> While not immune, probably safer than XP and newer, only because nobody
>>> is going to bother with the few boxes still running the antique.
>>>
>>
>> Does this mean my IBM 360/50 running Fortran is safe? o_O
>>
> A qualified maybe, I know my CP/M machine is safe. :-)
>
TDD
FrozenNorth
Mar 25, 2013, 8:15:27 PM3/25/13
to
in years. :-)
(no idea why I still have it)
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Mar 25, 2013, 8:27:18 PM3/25/13
to
Dustin wrote:
> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
> huh? Why is win98 immune to a botnet, exactly?
Virus Guy thinks his W98 is invulnerable. Period. He refuses to admit that
the sole reason is it's not targeted much anymore because it is so old. He
would rather be mired in the last millennium, I suppose.
One day soon he will be the only person still using it. Everyone else will
have advanced to new hardware and OSes.
--
-bts
-This space for rent, but the price is high
Juan Wei
Mar 25, 2013, 8:30:14 PM3/25/13
to
FrozenNorth has written on 3/25/2013 7:55 PM:
> On 3/25/2013 8:49 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
>> On 3/25/2013 4:23 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
>>> On 3/25/2013 5:55 PM, Dustin wrote:
>>>> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
>>>>
>>>>> ~BD~ wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
>>>>>
>>>>> No - because I run Windows 98.
>>>>>
>>>>> Next question?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> huh? Why is win98 immune to a botnet, exactly?
>>>>
>>> While not immune, probably safer than XP and newer, only because nobody
>>> is going to bother with the few boxes still running the antique.
>>>
>>
>> Does this mean my IBM 360/50 running Fortran is safe? o_O
>>
> A qualified maybe, I know my CP/M machine is safe. :-)
Mine is safe because it's turned off. ;-)
>> On 3/25/2013 4:23 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
>>> On 3/25/2013 5:55 PM, Dustin wrote:
>>>> Virus Guy <Vi...@Guy.com> wrote in news:514E04D6...@Guy.com:
>>>>
>>>>> ~BD~ wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> BOTNET ALERT: Are You Vulnerable?
>>>>>
>>>>> No - because I run Windows 98.
>>>>>
>>>>> Next question?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> huh? Why is win98 immune to a botnet, exactly?
>>>>
>>> While not immune, probably safer than XP and newer, only because nobody
>>> is going to bother with the few boxes still running the antique.
>>>
>>
>> Does this mean my IBM 360/50 running Fortran is safe? o_O
>>
> A qualified maybe, I know my CP/M machine is safe. :-)
The Daring Dufas
Mar 25, 2013, 9:52:54 PM3/25/13
to
items on The Web every now and then. I had a mint IBM green screen 5mb
hard drive box that never failed to boot and run. It was built like a
tank much like the early Motorola cellphones but I lost it in a move,
darn it! ^_^
TDD
Message has been deleted
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Mar 26, 2013, 1:38:16 PM3/26/13
to
Dustin wrote, of W98:
> still perfectly capable of being infected, taken, and controlled.
Sure. It's just VG's misguided assumption that it's not, because it is so
old that it isn't targeted very much anymore.
> still perfectly capable of being infected, taken, and controlled.
Sure. It's just VG's misguided assumption that it's not, because it is so
old that it isn't targeted very much anymore.
FromTheRafters
Mar 26, 2013, 1:50:50 PM3/26/13
to
Dustin explained :
> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.non...@example.invalid> wrote in
> news:kiqq16$7ip$2...@dont-email.me:
> You're likely familiar with irc... So you know about eggdrop shells,
> eggbots, mirc bots, dcc bots, warbots, etc etc etc.
>
> Well, At one point, I too ran win9x and I did indeed have eggies on her.
> several eggies. several mirc bots, etc...
>
> And at one point, my win98se machine did have control of a real
> "botnet". So I had to ask why he thought he was somehow, immune to them.
> Last I checked, win98 has built in networking and supports native win32
> PE code...
> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.non...@example.invalid> wrote in
> news:kiqq16$7ip$2...@dont-email.me:
> eggbots, mirc bots, dcc bots, warbots, etc etc etc.
>
> Well, At one point, I too ran win9x and I did indeed have eggies on her.
> several eggies. several mirc bots, etc...
>
> And at one point, my win98se machine did have control of a real
> "botnet". So I had to ask why he thought he was somehow, immune to them.
> Last I checked, win98 has built in networking and supports native win32
> PE code...
>
> still perfectly capable of being infected, taken, and controlled.
I think we are all familiar enough with VG to know what the problem is.
> still perfectly capable of being infected, taken, and controlled.
0 new messages