On 7/9/2010 3:15 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

> On 09/07/2010 2:16 AM, Alias wrote:

 

>> On 07/09/2010 02:00 AM, Boscoe wrote:

 

>>> On 08/07/2010 4:33 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-million-scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365

 

>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.

 

>>>>

 

>>>

 

>>> You are a little troll... get your knackers around this...

 

>>>

 

>>>

 

>>>

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> Gosh, one trojan only available through IRC whereas Windows has millions

 

>> of malware written for it and has a far larger percentage of infected

 

>> computers than Linux does. Wrap your mind around that and STFU.

 

>>

 

>

 

> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably, the trojan was

 

> written for Linux and very puzzling in itself, since Linux has such a

 

> small user base.

 

 

 

And it needed user input and was nuked soon after it appeared. BFD. The

 

hundreds of thousands of Windows boxes in net bots is much more serious

 

and you know it.

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

Boscoe wrote in

 

news:mhFZn.70974$hS4.43613@newsfe26.ams2:

 

 

> On 09/07/2010 2:16 AM, Alias wrote:

 

>> On 07/09/2010 02:00 AM, Boscoe wrote:

 

>>> On 08/07/2010 4:33 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-millio

 

>>>> n-scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365

 

>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.

 

>>>>

 

>>>

 

>>> You are a little troll... get your knackers around

 

>>> this...

 

>>> >> from_malware_think_again_its_been_hacked>

 

>>>

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> Gosh, one trojan only available through IRC whereas

 

>> Windows has millions of malware written for it and has a

 

>> far larger percentage of infected computers than Linux

 

>> does. Wrap your mind around that and STFU.

 

>>

 

>

 

> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,

 

> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in

 

> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.

 

 

 

Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of

 

prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus

 

that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.

 

This one however, did not.

 

 

 

As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan

 

anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the

 

*source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked

 

version, it wasn't a binary.

On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:

 

> Boscoe wrote in>

 

>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,

 

>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in

 

>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.

 

>

 

> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of

 

> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus

 

> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.

 

> This one however, did not.

 

>

 

> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan

 

> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the

 

> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked

 

> version, it wasn't a binary.

 

>

 

 

 

They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well

 

they are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.

 

Tiresome.

Report: 1 out of 22 million scanned computers infected with trojans...

 

wrote in message

 

news:i162l8$33s$1@speranza.aioe.org...

 

> how is your vagina doing frank?

 

 

 

You really are a sick fuck. Too bad you will NEVER see a real vagina again

 

in your lifetime! Now stop talking about it. It's probably best the you

 

power down your PC and have a Jerk Off session.

wrote in message

 

news:i161d3$n1$1@speranza.aioe.org...

 

> HOW IS YOUR VAGINA DOING FRANK?

 

 

 

You sure like talking about something you will NEVER see or touch again in

 

your lifetime! HA HA HA HA HA - Now go find a Sheep to fuck!

 

 

 

Just FYI.

On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>> Boscoe wrote in>

 

>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,

 

>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in

 

>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.

 

>>

 

>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of

 

>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus

 

>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.

 

>> This one however, did not.

 

>>

 

>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan

 

>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the

 

>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked

 

>> version, it wasn't a binary.

 

>>

 

>

 

> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well they

 

> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse. Tiresome.

 

 

 

You're kidding, right?

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

On 7/9/2010 8:27 AM, DanS wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Get lost you boring piece of fucking crap, I don't want to be bothered

 

with you, as your dumbass is liable to start going off the deep-end

 

again you damn Linuxtroll.

On 09/07/2010 4:34 PM, Alias wrote:

 

> On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

>> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>>> Boscoe wrote in>

 

>>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,

 

>>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in

 

>>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.

 

>>>

 

>>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of

 

>>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus

 

>>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.

 

>>> This one however, did not.

 

>>>

 

>>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan

 

>>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the

 

>>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked

 

>>> version, it wasn't a binary.

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well they

 

>> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.

 

>> Tiresome.

 

>

 

> You're kidding, right?

 

>

 

 

 

No, are you?

 

 

 

They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the road who fiddles

 

around with his car engine every Sunday morning. And you know it's sad

 

but true.

On 07/09/2010 06:07 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

> On 09/07/2010 4:34 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>> On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

>>> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>>>> Boscoe wrote in>

 

>>>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,

 

>>>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in

 

>>>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.

 

>>>>

 

>>>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of

 

>>>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus

 

>>>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.

 

>>>> This one however, did not.

 

>>>>

 

>>>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan

 

>>>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the

 

>>>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked

 

>>>> version, it wasn't a binary.

 

>>>>

 

>>>

 

>>> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well they

 

>>> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.

 

>>> Tiresome.

 

>>

 

>> You're kidding, right?

 

>>

 

>

 

> No, are you?

 

>

 

> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the road who fiddles

 

> around with his car engine every Sunday morning. And you know it's sad

 

> but true.

 

 

 

May have been true ten years ago. Now Linux is going mainstream and it

 

isn't true any more. It's just stale MS FUD and only uninformed fools

 

like you believe it. If you were to install Ubuntu or Mint, you wouldn't

 

know what you just posted is crap.

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

Boscoe wrote in

 

news:iWGZn.182777$k15.2229@hurricane:

 

 

> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>> Boscoe wrote in>

 

>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected.

 

>>> Presumably, the trojan was written for Linux and very

 

>>> puzzling in itself, since Linux has such a small user

 

>>> base.

 

>>

 

>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of

 

>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux

 

>> trojan/virus that actually replicates in the wild and

 

>> causes a problem. This one however, did not.

 

>>

 

>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan

 

>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow

 

>> the *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a

 

>> borked version, it wasn't a binary.

 

>>

 

>

 

> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux

 

> brotherhood - well they are bit of joke, aren't they? -

 

> has always got some poor excuse. Tiresome.

 

 

 

I don't quite know how to interpret your reply....

 

 

 

Let's see..."fuss about nothing"....maybe, maybe not. I didn't

 

see any indication of how the source code got replaced.

 

 

 

....."a bit of a joke, aren't they ?".....some are, most not.

 

Just as the very vocal MS users are a joke too, most users are

 

not. Do you think the Windows users (trolls) here that

 

constantly attack Linux aren't a joke too ? Or rather, do you

 

see them as intelligent, together, well-spoken individuals ?

 

 

 

....."always some poor excuse."....reasons, excuses, who's to

 

say what's what...

 

 

 

.....I personally don't think the happenings in the linked

 

article represent any inherent issues with Linux security, or

 

the start of a flood of malware for Linux.....

>> You're kidding, right?

 

>>

 

>

 

> No, are you?

 

>

 

> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the

 

> road who fiddles around with his car engine every Sunday

 

> morning. And you know it's sad but true.

 

 

 

Personally, the only 'tinkering' I've ever done with my Linux

 

boxes, is done directly after install time and that's only to

 

get everything working as I like, installed, etc.

 

 

 

Once all is up and running, I don't screw with the system at

 

all. What's the point ?

 

 

 

Unless of course you mean trying s/w. I mean, if it works, what

 

is there to mess round with ?

On 7/9/2010 6:39 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>>> You're kidding, right?

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> No, are you?

 

>>

 

>> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the

 

>> road who fiddles around with his car engine every Sunday

 

>> morning. And you know it's sad but true.

 

>

 

> Personally, the only 'tinkering' I've ever done with my Linux

 

> boxes, is done directly after install time and that's only to

 

> get everything working as I like, installed, etc.

 

>

 

> Once all is up and running, I don't screw with the system at

 

> all. What's the point ?

 

>

 

> Unless of course you mean trying s/w. I mean, if it works, what

 

> is there to mess round with ?

 

 

 

The same tinkering is done with Windows. The fool is just revealing his

 

stereotypical views of Linux users that he learned by reading MS FUD.

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

"Alias" wrote in message

 

news:i17inh$qe9$1@news.eternal-september.org...

 

> On 07/09/2010 06:07 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

>> On 09/07/2010 4:34 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>>> On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

>>>> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>>>>> Boscoe wrote in>

 

>>>>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,

 

>>>>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in

 

>>>>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.

 

>>>>>

 

>>>>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of

 

>>>>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus

 

>>>>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.

 

>>>>> This one however, did not.

 

>>>>>

 

>>>>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan

 

>>>>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the

 

>>>>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked

 

>>>>> version, it wasn't a binary.

 

>>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well

 

>>>> they

 

>>>> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.

 

>>>> Tiresome.

 

>>>

 

>>> You're kidding, right?

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> No, are you?

 

>>

 

>> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the road who fiddles

 

>> around with his car engine every Sunday morning. And you know it's sad

 

>> but true.

 

>

 

> May have been true ten years ago. Now Linux is going mainstream and it

 

> isn't true any more. It's just stale MS FUD and only uninformed fools like

 

> you believe it. If you were to install Ubuntu or Mint, you wouldn't know

 

> what you just posted is crap.

 

>

 

> --

 

> Alias

 

 

 

Must be a pretty small stream Linux is in. Linux has been around for many

 

years yet most reject Linux as garbage. As they should.

 

 

 

Stick with Windows to get any real work done.

On 09/07/2010 5:36 PM, DanS wrote:

 

 

> ...."a bit of a joke, aren't they ?".....some are, most not.

 

> Just as the very vocal MS users are a joke too, most users are

 

> not. Do you think the Windows users (trolls) here that

 

> constantly attack Linux aren't a joke too ? Or rather, do you

 

> see them as intelligent, together, well-spoken individuals ?

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

 

 

Because it's not a moderated group you will get individuals on here who,

 

because of their

 

own inadequacies, seem happy to destroy a Windows group that's here to

 

help people. It's neither clever or mature

 

but a sad fact of life. As for posting how good Linux is on an open

 

Windows 7 group, what do you expect?

 

So, Windows uses won't be flamed for posting how great Windows is in a

 

Linux group? Must try it sometime.

On 07/09/2010 07:47 PM, Heywood Jablowme wrote:

 

>

 

>

 

> "Alias" wrote in message

 

> news:i17inh$qe9$1@news.eternal-september.org...

 

>> On 07/09/2010 06:07 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

>>> On 09/07/2010 4:34 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>>>> On 7/9/2010 5:06 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

>>>>> On 09/07/2010 3:31 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>>>>>> Boscoe wrote in>

 

>>>>>>> Yer, but the Windows servers were unaffected. Presumably,

 

>>>>>>> the trojan was written for Linux and very puzzling in

 

>>>>>>> itself, since Linux has such a small user base.

 

>>>>>>

 

>>>>>> Why is that puzzling ? I would think there'd be a lot of

 

>>>>>> prestige in writing the first *successful* Linux trojan/virus

 

>>>>>> that actually replicates in the wild and causes a problem.

 

>>>>>> This one however, did not.

 

>>>>>>

 

>>>>>> As a matter of fact, this wasn't even *really* a trojan

 

>>>>>> anyway, **in a Windows-sense** anyway, as it seems somehow the

 

>>>>>> *source code* for the daemen (sp?) was replaced with a borked

 

>>>>>> version, it wasn't a binary.

 

>>>>>>

 

>>>>>

 

>>>>> They made a fuss about nothing, then!! The Linux brotherhood - well

 

>>>>> they

 

>>>>> are bit of joke, aren't they? - has always got some poor excuse.

 

>>>>> Tiresome.

 

>>>>

 

>>>> You're kidding, right?

 

>>>>

 

>>>

 

>>> No, are you?

 

>>>

 

>>> They tinker with their machines like the idiot over the road who fiddles

 

>>> around with his car engine every Sunday morning. And you know it's sad

 

>>> but true.

 

>>

 

>> May have been true ten years ago. Now Linux is going mainstream and it

 

>> isn't true any more. It's just stale MS FUD and only uninformed fools

 

>> like you believe it. If you were to install Ubuntu or Mint, you

 

>> wouldn't know what you just posted is crap.

 

>>

 

>> --

 

>> Alias

 

>

 

> Must be a pretty small stream Linux is in. Linux has been around for

 

> many years yet most reject Linux as garbage. As they should.

 

 

 

Only those who are too stupid to install and configure it like YOU.

 

 

>

 

> Stick with Windows to get any real work done.

 

 

 

You don't have any real work to get done.

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

Boscoe wrote in

 

news:gEJZn.55402$cJ6.13460@hurricane:

 

 

> On 09/07/2010 5:36 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>

 

>> ...."a bit of a joke, aren't they ?".....some are, most

 

>> not. Just as the very vocal MS users are a joke too, most

 

>> users are not. Do you think the Windows users (trolls)

 

>> here that constantly attack Linux aren't a joke too ? Or

 

>> rather, do you see them as intelligent, together,

 

>> well-spoken individuals ?

 

>>

 

>>

 

>>

 

>

 

> Because it's not a moderated group you will get individuals

 

> on here who, because of their

 

> own inadequacies, seem happy to destroy a Windows group

 

> that's here to help people. It's neither clever or mature

 

> but a sad fact of life. As for posting how good Linux is

 

> on an open Windows 7 group, what do you expect?

 

 

 

Actually, the thread wasn't about how good Linux is.....it was

 

about how a large percentage of the scanned Windows boxes were

 

compromised.

 

 

 

You were the one the interjected the linked article.

 

 

> So, Windows uses won't be flamed for posting how great

 

> Windows is in a Linux group?

 

 

 

Of course they will, but again, attitude has a lot to do with

 

it. Intelligent debate with facts and information get conuter

 

facts and counter information back. D*ckheads get sh*t back.

 

 

 

But, I digress......the main story here wasn't how great Linux

 

is (or isn't), it was about compromised Windows boxes.

On 09/07/2010 7:52 PM, DanS wrote:

 

 

> But, I digress......the main story here wasn't how great Linux

 

> is (or isn't), it was about compromised Windows boxes.

 

 

 

From a known Linux troll, done for mischief and guaranteed to incense a

 

good many posters on here. So, there's no excuse is there?

Alias wrote:

 

 

> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-million-scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365

 

>

 

> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.

 

>

 

 

 

Just means one out of two users don't clean cookies.

 

Many AV's report cookies as "tracking cookies", and then bundle that

 

term into the "malware" category.

 

Very effective method of selling AV software....make people paranoid.

 

 

 

You ever get CCleaner running?

 

It had you stumped a couple of weeks ago.

 

 

 

--

 

Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,

 

Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.

On 7/9/2010 1:52 PM, DanS wrote:

 

> Boscoe wrote in

 

> news:gEJZn.55402$cJ6.13460@hurricane:

 

>

 

>> > On 09/07/2010 5:36 PM, DanS wrote:

 

 

>> >

 

>>> >> ...."a bit of a joke, aren't they ?".....some are, most

 

>>> >> not. Just as the very vocal MS users are a joke too, most

 

>>> >> users are not. Do you think the Windows users (trolls)

 

>>> >> here that constantly attack Linux aren't a joke too ? Or

 

>>> >> rather, do you see them as intelligent, together,

 

>>> >> well-spoken individuals ?

 

>>> >>

 

>>> >>

 

>>> >>

 

>> >

 

>> > Because it's not a moderated group you will get individuals

 

>> > on here who, because of their

 

>> > own inadequacies, seem happy to destroy a Windows group

 

>> > that's here to help people. It's neither clever or mature

 

>> > but a sad fact of life. As for posting how good Linux is

 

>> > on an open Windows 7 group, what do you expect?

 

> Actually, the thread wasn't about how good Linux is.....it was

 

> about how a large percentage of the scanned Windows boxes were

 

> compromised.

 

>

 

 

 

And the reason they were scanned was someone thought they were

 

compromised! So over half of the suspect boxes had nothing wrong.

 

 

 

Of course you couldn't have compromised that many Linux boxes, as you

 

would have to double the installs just to get that many in the first place!

On 7/8/2010 8:17 PM, DanS wrote:

 

> Boscoe wrote in

 

> news:GEtZn.6586$mv6.1300@newsfe25.ams2:

 

>

 

>> On 08/07/2010 4:33 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-million-

 

>>> scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365

 

>>>

 

>>>

 

>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> You are a little troll... get your knackers around this...

 

>> > om_malware_think_again_its_been_hacked>

 

>>

 

>

 

> Old news. And completely misrepresentative of what transpired.

 

>

 

 

 

Perhaps this one is more interesting?

 

 

 

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/linux_trojan_avoids_detection_almost_year

alias is proly infected and does not even know it!...LOL!

 

On 7/9/2010 3:26 PM, Bob I wrote:

 

>

 

>

 

> On 7/8/2010 8:17 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>> Boscoe wrote in

 

>> news:GEtZn.6586$mv6.1300@newsfe25.ams2:

 

>>

 

>>> On 08/07/2010 4:33 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-million-

 

>>>> scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365

 

>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.

 

>>>>

 

>>>

 

>>> You are a little troll... get your knackers around this...

 

>>> >> om_malware_think_again_its_been_hacked>

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> Old news. And completely misrepresentative of what transpired.

 

>>

 

>

 

> Perhaps this one is more interesting?

 

>

 

> http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/linux_trojan_avoids_detection_almost_year

 

>

 

>

 

 

 

Yeah, and our resident linux advocate, our lying linturd spamming, FUD

 

spreading troll alias, is proly infected and does not even know it!...LOL!

 

He is that stupid!

 

Oops!

On 07/09/2010 09:41 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

> On 09/07/2010 7:52 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>

 

>> But, I digress......the main story here wasn't how great Linux

 

>> is (or isn't), it was about compromised Windows boxes.

 

>

 

> From a known Linux troll, done for mischief and guaranteed to incense a

 

> good many posters on here. So, there's no excuse is there?

 

 

 

More like a warning you should heed.

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

On 07/09/2010 09:54 PM, Death wrote:

 

> Alias wrote:

 

>

 

>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-million-scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365

 

>>

 

>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.

 

>>

 

>

 

> Just means one out of two users don't clean cookies.

 

> Many AV's report cookies as "tracking cookies", and then bundle that

 

> term into the "malware" category.

 

> Very effective method of selling AV software....make people paranoid.

 

 

 

You obviously haven't ever seen a truly infected Windows computer.

 

 

>

 

> You ever get CCleaner running?

 

 

 

Of course, it's very easy.

 

 

> It had you stumped a couple of weeks ago.

 

 

 

Um, no it didn't.

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

Alias wrote:

 

 

> On 07/09/2010 09:41 PM, Boscoe wrote:

 

>> On 09/07/2010 7:52 PM, DanS wrote:

 

>>

 

>>> But, I digress......the main story here wasn't how great Linux

 

>>> is (or isn't), it was about compromised Windows boxes.

 

>>

 

>> From a known Linux troll, done for mischief and guaranteed to incense a

 

>> good many posters on here. So, there's no excuse is there?

 

>

 

> More like a warning you should heed.

 

>

 

 

 

More likely dumbass shit from your fucking high as a kite lunatic brain.

 

You really are dumb.

 

Death is calling you home.

 

You couldn't hold out for two fuckin weeks...like I said.

 

 

 

--

 

Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,

 

Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.

Alias wrote:

 

 

> On 07/09/2010 09:54 PM, Death wrote:

 

>> Alias wrote:

 

>>

 

>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-million-scanned-computers-infected-with-malware/5365

 

>>>

 

>>> Gosh, that's almost 1 out of every 2 Windows computers.

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> Just means one out of two users don't clean cookies.

 

>> Many AV's report cookies as "tracking cookies", and then bundle that

 

>> term into the "malware" category.

 

>> Very effective method of selling AV software....make people paranoid.

 

>

 

> You obviously haven't ever seen a truly infected Windows computer.

 

>

 

 

 

I'm not one of your clients.

 

Dumbass.

 

 

>>

 

>> You ever get CCleaner running?

 

>

 

> Of course, it's very easy.

 

>

 

 

 

Yet..it confused you.

 

Or the UAC prompt did.

 

Why the fuck are you running it so much the prompt bothers you?

 

Porn cookies are harmless.

 

 

>> It had you stumped a couple of weeks ago.

 

>

 

> Um, no it didn't.

 

>

 

 

 

Umm, standing upright has you stumped.

 

 

 

--

 

Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,

 

Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.