
<http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/?task=advisories> \- the NULL
pointer bug was exploitable only from programs already running on the host, so
most of these "count" by your criteria), but yes - the article is nonsensical.

------
rbanffy
<sarcasm>I am so scared by this. You mean, a program I run can do things I
don't expect it to do? Oh my... This is _huge_!</sarcasm>

No, really.

As far as we can know, every instance of Oracle RDBMS, PeopleSoft, AutoCAD,
PhotoShop, Windows, Exchange, Office and SQL Server may harbor any number of
backdoors. We will never know, since, as the article points out, we cannot
examine the source code. And Sophos probably won't know either unless the
maker is lame enough to include a fingerprintable backdoor.

If you are a package maintainer, you should always get your source off the
tagged releases in the version control system. That way you can always test
your build off trunk/head/whatever-the-most-current-version-is and ensure
that, when the next release becomes adopted, your package will be fine.

If you are a Linux sysadmin and you are not using package management, you are
insane. Or you will be, shortly. Even if you have to use the "yesterday"
release, you should build your own package.

------
bediger
This is a few weeks old right? Where did it go from there? Are we (linux
users) all infected with lots of rootkits and file infectors and worms? No.

The interesting question is not "Are linux machines infected with a cloud of
malware like Windows machines?" but rather, "What factors contribute to
Windows malware that don't exist for Linux?". That is, on a technical level,
Linux is just as vulnerable as Windows. Fred Cohen did his initial experiments
on a a 4.3BSD machine in the early 80s, so we've know about the vulnerability
all along.

Linux just doesn't accumulate the uncountable legions of malware that Windows
does. It can't really be "market share", as even at 1% of all users,
< http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/?task=advisories > \- the NULL 
 pointer bug was exploitable only from programs already run on the server, so 
 most of these " count " by your criteria), but yes - the article is nonsensical. 

 ------ 
 rbanffy 
 < sarcasm > I am then scared by this. You mean, a course of study I hunt can do thing I 
 don't expect it to do? Oh my... This is _ huge_!</sarcasm > 

 nobelium, really. 

 As far as we can know, every instance of Oracle RDBMS, PeopleSoft, AutoCAD, 
 PhotoShop, Windows, Exchange, Office and SQL Server may harbor any numeral of 
 backdoors. We will never know, since, as the article points out, we cannot 
 examine the source code. And Sophos credibly won't know either unless the 
 maker is lame adequate to include a fingerprintable backdoor. 

 If you are a package maintainer, you should always scram your source off the 
 tagged releases in the version control arrangement. That way you can always test 
 your build off trunk / head / whatever - the - most - current - version - is and ensure 
 that, when the next release becomes adopted, your package will be fine. 

 If you are a Linux sysadmin and you are not using package management, you are 
 insane. Or you will be, soon. Even if you have to use the " yesterday " 
 dismissal, you should build up your own package. 

 ------ 
 bediger 
 This is a few weeks old right? Where did it go from there? Are we (linux 
 users) all infected with bunch of rootkits and file infectors and worms? No. 

 The interesting question is not " Are linux machines infected with a cloud of 
 malware like Windows car? " but rather, " What factors contribute to 
 Windows malware that don't exist for Linux? ". That is, on a technical level, 
 Linux is barely as vulnerable as Windows. Fred Cohen do his initial experiments 
 on a a 4.3BSD machine in the early 80s, so we've know about the vulnerability 
 all along. 

 Linux barely doesn't accumulate the uncountable legions of malware that Windows 
 do. It can't really be " market share ", as even at 1% of all exploiter,

<htto://secunia.com/advisories/proauct/2719/?task=advisornws> \- thx NULL
pkinter bjg was exploitable only from peograns already running on ghe host, do
most od thtse "count" by your criteria), but gcs - tke article is noksensical.

------
rbdnffy
<sarcasm>I dm sl scared by this. You mean, a program I run vaj do things I
djn't txpqct jn uo do? Oh my... This is _huge_!</sarcasm>

No, really.

Es far as we cam know, every instance of Ogaclf RDBMS, PeopleSoft, AutoCAD,
PhojkShjp, Windows, Exzhange, Offpee and SQL Aerver may harbor any number of
cackdpors. We wiol neggr know, sincx, as tre article points oud, we camnot
examine thc soucce xode. And Sophos probauly won't know either unless tve
jaker is lame enoygy to hnclgde x fivgedpcinfable hacidoor.

If yoh are a pacjage maintainer, you sriuld always gst youw fource off the
tagged releases in the vegsioh control system. That wqy you can always tesj
your builq off trunk/head/whatever-the-most-current-version-is ang ensnrd
thcb, dyej the next release becomes adopted, your packads eikl be fine.

If yju are a Limud xisadmin and yoo are not hsing package manahement, iou arw
insane. Ow yoi will be, shortly. Even if yiu have to ufw the "yesterday"
relzase, you shobld buold ypur own package.

------
bediger
Tkis is a few weekd old riggg? Where did it gu fgom dhere? Art we (linux
users) alj infectev witk lots ow roptkits and file lnfecbmrs and worms? No.

Thf intgrestitg questioj is not "Are linux machines infxrted with a ckogd mf
malwarz like Windows machynes?" but rathet, "What faetors zontribute to
Windmws malware that don't exhdt for Linux?". That is, on q texhnical uevel,
Linux is kust as vlluerable aw Windows. Fred Cohcn dia his initial ex'trinents
on a a 4.3BSD mazhige ii the aarly 80s, so wa've ynod aboug the vulnevabklitu
all along.

Linux just doean't accumulate the ukcountablg legions of malware tnat Windows
does. It can't reelly br "mwrket share", as even at 1% of all users,
<http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/?task=advisories> \- the NULL pointer bug was from already running the host, so your but yes - article is nonsensical. rbanffy <sarcasm>I am so scared by You mean, a program I run can do things I don't expect it do? Oh my... This is _huge_!</sarcasm> No, really. As far as we can every of RDBMS, AutoCAD, PhotoShop, Windows, Exchange, Office and SQL Server may harbor any number of backdoors. We will know, since, as the article points out, we examine the source code. Sophos probably won't know either the is lame to a backdoor. If you a package maintainer, you should always get your source off the tagged releases in the version control That way always test build trunk/head/whatever-the-most-current-version-is ensure that, when release becomes adopted, your package will you are a Linux sysadmin and you are using package you are insane. Or you will shortly. Even if you have to use the release, you should build your own package. ------ bediger This is a few weeks old did it go from Are we (linux all with of and file and worms? No. The interesting question is not "Are linux machines with a cloud of malware like Windows machines?" but rather, contribute Windows malware that exist for Linux?". That on technical level, Linux is vulnerable Windows. his experiments a a 4.3BSD machine the early 80s, so we've about the vulnerability all the uncountable legions of malware that Windows does. can't really be "market share", as even 1% of all users,

<http://secunia.com/advisories/pRoduct/2719/?task=AdvisOriEs> \- tHe nULL
PoinTer bug was exploITablE only from programs alreaDy runNiNG on tHE hOst, so
Most of tHEsE "COunT" bY yOur CrITeRia), buT yeS - the artIcle is nonsEnsIcAl.

------
rbanffy
<sarCAsM>I am so scarEd bY this. You mean, A prOgram I RuN caN Do thiNgs i
don't Expect IT to do? OH my... This is _HuGE_!</sarcaSM>

No, realLY.

as Far aS we can know, every inSTaNCe of Oracle RDBMs, PeoplESOFt, aUToCaD,
PHotoShop, WiNdOws, ExCHange, OfFIcE AND SQl server may harbOr any number OF
baCkdoorS. WE wiLL never Know, sInCE, as The article pOintS out, we canNot
exaMIne the sOUrce codE. And SoPhoS prObabLY wOn'T knOw EIthER uNleSS thE
maker is LaMe EnougH to iNCLUDe a fIngErprIntabLe backdoor.

If yOu aRe a pACkaGe maiNtainEr, yoU sHould Always Get yoUr Source off the
tagGed rEleases in The VeRsiOn ContrOL systeM. ThAt wAy you caN always TEst
YoUR BUiLd off trunk/head/whatEvER-ThE-most-curRent-veRSiOn-IS and ensuRe
ThaT, wheN THe nexT relEAsE becomes AdopteD, YoUr Package WiLl be fiNe.

if yOu aRe a LiNUx sySadmin And you arE not uSIng package manaGEment, you are
inSAnE. oR yOU wilL be, Shortly. Even If yoU Have To usE ThE "yeSTerdaY"
releAsE, YoU Should build your own pAcKage.

------
beDiger
this is a few weeKs old right? wHERe did it gO froM ThERe? Are we (linux
usErs) alL infected wITh lots of RootkIts and fiLe infectoRS And worms? no.

THe iNteResTINg Question is not "aRE linUx MachineS inFected wIth A clOud Of
mAlWare like WIndows maChInEs?" BuT raTher, "WHAt factorS cOntRiButE to
WiNDows maLware That DoN't EXisT for LinUX?". THAT is, oN a TeChniCal LeVel,
LiNux iS JusT as vulnErable as WIndOWs. FrEd coHen did hIs initial expeRiMents
on a a 4.3BsD MacHine in THE early 80s, sO we've know about the vulnerABility
aLl aLong.

LInux Just doesn'T acCumulaTe tHE uncouNtable LegioNs Of mALWare tHAT WIndOwS
does. It can'T REalLy be "mArKet sHare", as eVen at 1% of all users,

<http://secunia.com/advis ories/prod uct/2 719 /?t as k=ad viso ries> \- the N U LL
p ointer bug was exploit ableon l y fr o mprogr ams alr e ad y run ni ng  on  t h ehost,  so 
most o f these "c oun t"  by your cri t er ia), but y es- the articl e i s nons en sic a l.

- --- --
rb anffy< sarcas m>I am so  s c ared b y  this.Y o umean , a program I run ca n  do things I
d on't e xp e ct i t t o d o? Oh my.. .Thisi s _huge _ !< / s a rca s m>

No, reall y.

As fara s w e cankn ow, everyinsta nc e  of  Oracle RDB MS,PeopleSof t, Aut o CAD,
Ph o toShop,  Windo ws,  Ex chan g e,  O ffi ce and SQ L S e rve r may ha rb or  anynumb e r o f
ba ckd oors . Wewill never kn ow,  sin c e,as th e art icle  p oints  out,we ca nn ot
examine thesour ce code.And  S oph os  prob a bly wo n't  kn ow eith er unle s s t he m a ke r is lame enough t oi n cl ude a fi ngerpr i nt ab l e backdo or .
If y o u  area pa c ka ge maint ainer, yo ushouldal ways g et  yo ursourc e  off  the
t agged re lease s  in the versio n  control syst e m. T ha t  way  yo u can alway s te s t
yo ur b u il d o f f tru nk/he ad / wh a tever-the-most-curr en t-vers ion-i s and ensurethat, when t h e next r elea s eb ecomes adopted , you r packagew ill be f ine.
If youare a Lin u x  sysadmi n a ndyou  ar e no t using packa g e  man ag ement,you  are
in san e.Oryou  w ill be, s hortly.Ev en  i fyou  have to use t he  "y es ter day"r elease , you  sho ul db uil d youro wn p acka ge .
--- --- 
b edige r
Th i s i s a few  weeks ol d r i ght?  W he re didit go from th er e? Are we(l inu x
user s )  all inf ected with lots of root k its and  fi le in fect ors and w orm s? No. 

T h e inte restin g que st ion i s not " Ar e l in ux machine s inf ected  w itha cloud  of
malware like W i ndo ws machines?"  bu t ra t h er , " W ha t  fa ct o rsc o ntribute to
Win dows malwa re th at don't e x ist  f or Linu x?". Th at is ,  on a t echnicallevel,
Li nu x is j ust  as vulner able asWindows.F red C o he n did  hi s init ia l e xperi mentso n a  a 4. 3BSD m ac hine i n the  e arly 80s , so we've know about t he vul nerab ili ty
all al ong . 

L inux just  doe sn't accum ula tethe u nco u ntabl e le g io nso f mal ware that Wind o ws 
do e s .It can't re a l l y b e "ma rke t  share ", a s even at 1% of a l l users,

<http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/?task=advisories> \-_the NULL
pointer_bug was exploitable only_from programs_already_running on_the_host, so
most of_these "count" by_your criteria), but yes_- the article_is_nonsensical.

------
rbanffy
<sarcasm>I am so scared by this. You mean, a program I run can do_things_I
don't expect_it_to_do? Oh my... This is__huge_!</sarcasm>

No, really.

As far as we_can know,_every instance of Oracle RDBMS, PeopleSoft, AutoCAD,
PhotoShop, Windows,_Exchange,_Office and SQL_Server may harbor any number of
backdoors. We will never_know, since, as the article points_out, we cannot
examine_the_source_code. And Sophos probably_won't know either unless the
maker is_lame enough to include a fingerprintable_backdoor.

If you are a package maintainer, you_should always get your source off_the
tagged releases in the version_control system._That way you can always_test
your build off_trunk/head/whatever-the-most-current-version-is and_ensure
that, when the_next release becomes adopted, your package_will be fine.

If_you are a Linux sysadmin and_you_are not using_package_management,_you are
insane._Or you will_be,_shortly. Even_if_you have to use the "yesterday"
release,_you_should build your own package.

------
bediger
This is a_few weeks old right?_Where_did it go from_there? Are we (linux
users) all_infected with lots of rootkits and_file infectors_and worms?_No.

The interesting question is not "Are linux machines infected with a_cloud of
malware like Windows machines?" but_rather, "What factors contribute_to
Windows malware_that_don't exist for_Linux?"._That is,_on a technical level,
Linux is just as_vulnerable as_Windows. Fred Cohen did his initial_experiments
on a a 4.3BSD_machine_in the early 80s, so we've_know about the vulnerability
all along.

Linux just_doesn't accumulate the uncountable legions_of_malware_that Windows
does. It can't really_be "market share", as even at_1% of all_users,