KJKHyperion wrote:
why, Windows machines of course, I'm an attacker, not a fool! If you
were a terrorist, what would you rather do?
Crash the Twin Towers
Crash the dollar
There is no such thing as an "attacker". All actions, even such an
individual's, are driven by economical considerations.
With this said, if I were an attacker with economics in mind
why would I want to target a machine which has X amount of
vendors sifting through the much of malware and viruses when
I could spawn off an semi undetectable program and KEEP IT
THERE without having to wait for the next best thing.
I don't know about your logics on economics, but if I were
the attacker and I was looking for a constant steady stream
of revenue, I would go the Linux route. And if you think
for a second that "Boohoo Linux users are more inclined to
be security conscious" then you are the fool here. Of the
couple of thousand of brute force bots I see, none are on
Windows.
Whatever though, to each their own mechanisms of thought.
If you truly believe its all fine and dandy and things
won't get progressively worse by giving Linux to
inexperienced users, you are in for a rude awakening. If
you haven't stopped to read the facts that malware, *ware
creators are getting more savvy, then you seem to be
stuck somewhere in a world of fantasy.
--
====================================================
J. Oquendo
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1383A743
echo infiltrated.net|sed 's/^/sil@/g'
"Wise men talk because they have something to say;
fools, because they have to say something." -- Plato
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
