Clamav out of date
Harold Hartley
harold_hartley at verizon.net
Fri Oct 12 14:15:55 UTC 2007
Brian Fahrlander wrote:
> Harold Hartley wrote:
>
>
>> We all know that Microsoft server is connected to the internet and has
>> problems and neededs fixes/patches.
>> Well, the same can go for linux, but it depend on how well a admin or
>> end user sets up the configurations in it.
>>
>> All in all, neither Linux or Microsoft is superiour over each other and
>> both ends up with fixes or patches to fix any exploitables hole. Its
>> just that all the hackers or crackers spends more time writing viurus's
>> and such for windows and that is why we don't hear much about linux
>> having problems like windows does.
>>
>
> Uh, no. I don't mean to start a flame war, but I've wasted most of
> my life in Microsoft. I've set up thousands of customers between
> Huntsville, Alabama and Evansville, Indiana, who are now addicted to
> Microsoft code. They hate their computers, pay all that money, yet can't
> imagine life without it.
>
> There is, in fact, an enormous difference.
>
> When XP was released, as always, there were holes...most, with no
> reason. Then came SP1. Some holes were closed, brand new ones opened.
> And again, SP2, same plan. And just *somehow* virus writers were
> able to exploit them 20 minutes after leaving the Microsoft download site.
>
> There is a man in Russia who has posted a bounty. He will pay you
> $.06 for every CPU that your program gives him control of. This is just
> one of the things keeping a growing stable of over 1,000,000 viruses in
> the typical A/V arsenal.
>
> Yes, there are exploits. But in Linux they are only accidents, in
> Microsoft, it's a business. I've wasted enough time (96 man-hours in one
> case) ridding my employer's computers of a virus that we understood we
> were protected from. Their software is made by 'bots' that enjoy the
> props for making it to Microsoft, and put in 8 hours and go home. We
> write code, take pride in it, and are severely pissed when someone has
> breaks it. We actually *care* about the product, even though we don't
> get paid. That, in itself is a difference.
>
> I've heard the "Wait until Linux has 300,000,000 computers"
> argument; it doesn't hold water. Linux has always had a shorter
> security-patch release mechanism. And at no point do we have to be
> paranoid that a security patch will seriously harm our computers for
> market-domination reasons; Microsoft can make no such claim. (See the
> news last week.)
>
>
I'm glad you pointed this out to me as I have a dell latitude d800 that
came with windows XP and can't stand the screw ups when I try doing
stuff on it. I want to put linux on it, but will it work fine when I
need to swap my dvd/cd combo with a hard drive without having to restart
the computer to read it... Has linux developed enough to do this.
I've seen major improvements since I've started in 1997 with linux.
> Sorry; didn't mean to tick you off, just trying to correct the record.
>
>
Oh, I'm not mad, because whats to get mad about if someone has the
answers or just correcting someone with the right record.
Harold
More information about the ubuntu-users
mailing list