RE: How Secure is Windows, Really?

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: rob@xxxxxxxxx
>
> Even if we came up with a dozen examples someone would argue that it was
> not a virus because it didn't fit this technical definition that is so
> extremely limited that it can only run on Windows operating systems.
>
> Let's come up with new term for certain malicious CL programs.  Call it a
> "goomba".  And now we can say that Windows machines are immune to goomba's
> because they don't run CL.  And you should immediately switch to running
> your business off of i5/os because only it is susceptible to goomba's.

Faulty logic.  The description of a virus in this context is pretty simple:
it is something that can bypass normal security procedures to infect your
system and cause damage.

Logic bombs, where a programmer does something to break your machine, have
been around forever.  It requires someone who has access to your machine and
malicious intent.  Worms have been around for a long time as well.  The idea
of programs that can replicate from one computer to another has been around
since the 70s.

But it's the combination of a worm (self-replication or "infection") and a
malicious payload and the incredible stupidity of Windows programs (a vast
number of Windows exploits are "buffer overruns", which are perhaps the
laziest programming mistake any programmer can make) that makes Windows such
an ugly component to any network.  The worm portion of the virus bypasses
the security of your machine and then deposits its payload.  The fact that
the worm portion can be activated through something as innocuous as opening
a web page or an email is what makes the concept so insidious.

THERE ARE NO WORMS THAT AFFECT IBM MIDRANGE COMPUTERS.

Thus, there is no infection vector.  Yes, you can install a payload via a
RSTLIB and you can have a rogue programmer, but those are simple security
issues.  The problem with a worm is that it bypasses security during
replication.

This is not as simplistic as your malicious CL program, and your analogy is
about the same as banning oil and fertilizer because they can be used to
create bombs.

Joe