MS is vulnerable

Thu Jan 29 18:03:07 UTC 2004

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog at merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog at merit.edu] On 
> Behalf Of Jonathan Nichols
> Sent: January 29, 2004 12:53 PM
> To: nanog at merit.edu
> Subject: Re: MS is vulnerable
> 
> The reason there aren't any Mac viruses most certainly is 
> *not* because 
> "there are not as many of them." One could even go so far as 
> to say that 
> the Mac would be a more likely target because of Apple's security 
> claims. It's a much more high-profile target. Imagine the boasting 
> rights one would have if they could get a Mac virus to spread 
> in these 
> modern days!

I'm sure boasting about writing a Mac virus will make you the big man on the
block in your wing at Club Fed :)

Seriously, boasting about writing damaging viruses is downright stupid... So
the only way to make headlines is to write a really damaging virus that gets
lots of publicity.

Compare the following scenarios.

Scenario A:
Person writes damaging Mac virus.
1-3% of computers out there are infected.
Network operators barely notice a blip on their MRTG
Media doesn't pick up on the story, except for slashdot (and is /. really
media?).
Person feels his genius is underappreciated.
Person posts to bugtraq to boast of his achievement.
FBI shows up and takes him to Club Fed.

Scenario B:
Person writes damaging Windows virus/worm.
20% of computers out there are infected
Network operators scramble on this mailing list to figure out the right ACL
in vendor C, J, and others' syntax to slow down the thing.
CNN makes it one of the top ten headlines on their web site
TV news makes it the second story, right after the latest accusations that
Bush lied about something in Iraq.
Virus author quietly sits in the background smirking while he watches the TV
news.

Isn't B more fun for a virus author (and network operators' cardiologists)?

Vivien
-- 
Vivien M.
vivienm at dyndns.org
Assistant System Administrator
Dynamic Network Services, Inc.
http://www.dyndns.org/ 