t 10:29 PM 3/28/2001 -0500, Ben Collins wrote: >On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 01:26:39PM +1000, John Griffiths wrote: >> >IMO, this is nothing completely new or innovative. ASM has been around a >> >long time, even before viruses. It all boils down to people being smart >> >enough not to accept attachments form people they don't know, and >> >especially don't execute programs sent to you randomly over the >> >internet. >> >> Agreed up to a point. But all you need is one person to open it blind and >> then the rest go out to the adsress book and appear (to the next recipients) >> to be someone they know. which alters the balance somewhat. > >Good point...kind of a "the chain is only as strong as its weakest link" >scenario :) >
Also worth noting that the last few headline virusses on windows have done no more damage than a user-level virus operating on a unix machine. they have been notable in the denial of service aspects of their replication, and the cunning nature of their social engineering. plus re-insalling my OS is a lot less painful than losing my personal files. (backups notwithstanding)
