More than half of Windows machines are INFECTED with malware

[Chan Chung Hang Christopher]

Edward Craig wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Christopher Chan
> <christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:
>   
>> Edward Craig wrote:
>>     
>>> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Christopher Chan
>>> <christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Michael Haney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Siggy Brentrup <ubuntu at psycho.i21k.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Hi Amedee,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> got it right now ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 00:31 +0200, Amedee Van Gasse (on Ubuntu mailing lists) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> On Fri, October 2, 2009 09:07, Conrad Knauer wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>> I didn't realize it was that bad, but hey, on average that means that
>>>>>>>> every other Ubuntu install takes a malware-compromised system out of
>>>>>>>> commission :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>>> Yep. The other Ubuntu install is one less for the other Linux distro's.
>>>>>>> First we had IBM, then we had Microsoft, then came Google, and will
>>>>>>> Canonical be the next Evil Empire? ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>> Maybe, if they ever get large enough to really play with the behemoths.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>>>> Not likely, there's a little something called the GPL standing in
>>>>> their way of becoming anything even remotely like that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> I am sorry but that does not make any sense. You do realize that Google
>>>> is coming out with something that uses GPL software right? Their new
>>>> ChromeOS will be using a Linux kernel and I assume a fair bit of GNU
>>>> software too unless they intend to rewrite/create a good portion of what
>>>> goes into their operating system.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> The GPL ensures that there can be nothing we can't find in the OS.
>>> Whether we find it in time requires better concealment than I expect
>>> malware authors can commit to. Google might include easter eggs but I
>>> doubt any malware can take advantage.
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> Oops...lost track of the thread...I thought Michael was going on about
>> the 'ever get large enough' part. :-D
>>
>>
>> As for evil empire...somebody has to look to check for special
>> 'enhancements'...
>>     
> I can't envision Microsoft delivering software to the inernet so
> raddled with exploits yet there is over a decade's history to
> contradict that contention. McAfee founded the industry that swallowed
> it on those exploits. Perhaps I misremember history but it seems to me
> that a software toolmaker did a side project which was the foundation
> or model Symantec built on to swallow McAfee.
>  I have an unusual computing history (roughly abbreviated; IBM
> mainframe OSs > Windows 3.1 > FreeBSD/S.u.S.E. Linux > Debian > Ubuntu
> ) and didn't watch PCs closely until I installed Linux on a 486 in '97
> according to the Linux counter. So I missed viruses, adware, spyware
> and malware in general except at second or third hand. If it weren't
> for the spam caches I peruse when I must I wouldn't believe malware
> could be widespread.
>
>   


I meant special 'enhancements' in later distributions of Ubuntu if it 
ever becomes evil.