Windows

[4merper4mer]

I've used windows machines for twenty years and never had a virus. You'd have to be an idiot to get infected.

Dude. You came thisclose to being chopped into tiny little bits by a psychotic redhead you met with your computer and you're on here bragging about not getting a virus?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Dude. You came thisclose to being chopped into tiny little bits by a psychotic redhead you met with your computer and you're on here bragging about not getting a virus?

 

I'm a tech guy, not a people guy.

 

[grinreaper]

 

I'm a tech guy, not a people guy.

 

That's for sure. Period.

[Nanker]

Yawn.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

That's for sure. Period.

 

And you know what's great about being me? I couldn't give less of a !@#$ about it.

[reddogblitz]

My own unsubstantiated conspiracy theory is that we (US Government) did it. It only hit Russia and the surrounding area. It's payback time for messing with the election. We invented the thing. And, it sounds like something Trump would do.

[Deranged Rhino]

My own unsubstantiated conspiracy theory is that we (US Government) did it. It only hit Russia and the surrounding area. It's payback time for messing with the election. We invented the thing. And, it sounds like something Trump would do.

 

It's not unsubstantiated, there's lots of evidence pointing that direction. Whether it was done intentionally or through criminal negligence on the part of the IC is speculative.

 

CIA and NSA created a host of cyber weapons, kept them unclassified so they could share said weapons with unvetted contractors, and in a very direct way released the tools into the wild. They were also hacked in 2014 and lost a whole batch of cyber weapons - which they've been using as a cover but in reality they spread the tools themselves while paying US companies to keep back door exploits open.

[Foxx]

no way. we didn't create Stuxnet either.

[Deranged Rhino]

no way. we didn't create Stuxnet either.

[/dev/null]

A variant of the wannacry virus was released. The previous ransom of $300 has been raised to about treefiddy

 

Investigators are searching the Loch Ness area of Scotland for a giant crustacean from the paleolithic era

[reddogblitz]

It's not unsubstantiated, there's lots of evidence pointing that direction. Whether it was done intentionally or through criminal negligence on the part of the IC is speculative.

 

CIA and NSA created a host of cyber weapons, kept them unclassified so they could share said weapons with unvetted contractors, and in a very direct way released the tools into the wild. They were also hacked in 2014 and lost a whole batch of cyber weapons - which they've been using as a cover but in reality they spread the tools themselves while paying US companies to keep back door exploits open.

 

Glad to hear my unsubstantiated rumor actually has some substantiation to it. Thanks Rhino.

[ALF]

North Korea possibly behind global cyberattack, researchers say

By Ryan Gaydos Published May 16, 2017 Fox News

Cyber security researchers said Monday they may be able to link North Korea to the unprecedented global cyberattack that took more than 300,000 computers hostage in 150 countries last week.

Symantec and Kaspersky Lab said that some of the code used in the version of the WannaCry software had also been used in programs run by the North Korea-linked Lazarus Group.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/05/16/north-korea-possibly-behind-global-cyberattack-researchers-say.html

[Benjamin Franklin]

 

North Korea possibly behind global cyberattack, researchers say

By Ryan Gaydos Published May 16, 2017 Fox News

Cyber security researchers said Monday they may be able to link North Korea to the unprecedented global cyberattack that took more than 300,000 computers hostage in 150 countries last week.

Symantec and Kaspersky Lab said that some of the code used in the version of the WannaCry software had also been used in programs run by the North Korea-linked Lazarus Group.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/05/16/north-korea-possibly-behind-global-cyberattack-researchers-say.html

 

 

No no, it's the CIA. The CIA only wants you to think it was NK. And they killed Seth Rich to cover this up so they could get Trump elected and escalate Gamma Stage of the Illuminati Manifesto.

[OCinBuffalo]

Seems the crooks are always one step ahead of the law in this game. With that being said, with all of the countries affected, someone should be able to track these guys down. Something like this should result in a life sentence.

Remember this the next time some Democrat says he's going to tax/regulate/attack in some other way, the internet.

 

And, it's not 1 step, its more like 5. Actually, it's more like the government is -2 steps back, because they are a jobs program that keeps hiring incompetents (campaign staff/affirmative action), and paying off political big wigs with management jobs. Precisely how you get enough bad decisions, designs, and executions that allow the ENTIRE NHS to be taken. And, the hackers are +2 steps forward, because Microsoft does everything it can to keep everything and everybody at 0(on the timeline that suits them). When events force Microsoft to act quickly, it almost always means huge holes created by hastily written and poorly tested code. Microsoft has been playing catchup for years, and constantly trying to force their old, tired model back into relevance: by hasting filing their square pegs to fit into the round holes that the market wants.

 

When you do that: you leave cracks. Oh sure the peg fits, but not properly, and that's how the virus gets through.

 

Social media, that keep integrating everything either in the clear, or, with very shoddy authentication, are to blame here too.

 

And finally: it wasn't the hackers who designed England's NHS computer system. It was the government. Ransomware has been around for 10 years now, and in that time, what has the NHS done to ensure: 1. they have adequate backup architecture 2. they have adequate failover devices 3. they can completely dump their infected hardware and switch over to their backup architecture and failover devices instantly?

 

Clearly nothing. It's not like the cost, in today's hardware, is astronomical. In fact, there are companies who have been around at least 5 years who specialize in this, are competent, and for the NHS, would probably cost, at most, $40k a month(to maintain the backup capability, not to run the system on it, that obviously costs more, but it is by definition temporary). Even if it was $400k a month, isn't that pennies compared to the cost now?

 

They shouldn't be holding old transactional data in their systems anyway. As soon as it's a green-lit record it needs to be gone. And, an entire architecture should never be able to be compromised based on one successful intrusion.

 

But, remind me again: why do we want single payer here , complete with NHS-style IT competence?

Edited May 16, 2017 by OCinBuffalo

[Tiberius]

Remember this the next time some Democrat says he's going to tax/regulate/attack in some other way, the internet.

 

And, it's not 1 step, its more like 5. Actually, it's more like the government is -2 steps back, because they are a jobs program that keeps hiring incompetents (campaign staff/affirmative action), and paying off political big wigs with management jobs. Precisely how you get enough bad decisions, designs, and executions that allow the ENTIRE NHS to be taken. And, the hackers are +2 steps forward, because Microsoft does everything it can to keep everything and everybody at 0(on the timeline that suits them). When events force Microsoft to act quickly, it almost always means huge holes created by hastily written and poorly tested code. Microsoft has been playing catchup for years, and constantly trying to force their old, tired model back into relevance: by hasting filing their square pegs to fit into the round holes that the market wants.

 

When you do that: you leave cracks. Oh sure the peg fits, but not properly, and that's how the virus gets through.

 

Social media, that keep integrating everything either in the clear, or, with very shoddy authentication, are to blame here too.

 

And finally: it wasn't the hackers who designed England's NHS computer system. It was the government. Ransomware has been around for 10 years now, and in that time, what has the NHS done to ensure: 1. they have adequate backup architecture 2. they have adequate failover devices 3. they can completely dump their infected hardware and switch over to their backup architecture and failover devices instantly?

 

Clearly nothing. It's not like the cost, in today's hardware, is astronomical. In fact, there are companies who have been around at least 5 years who specialize in this, are competent, and for the NHS, would probably cost, at most, $40k a month(to maintain the backup capability, not to run the system on it, that obviously costs more, but it is by definition temporary). Even if it was $400k a month, isn't that pennies compared to the cost now?

 

They shouldn't be holding old transactional data in their systems anyway. As soon as it's a green-lit record it needs to be gone. And, an entire architecture should never be able to be compromised based on one successful intrusion.

 

But, remind me again: why do we want single payer here , complete with NHS-style IT competence?

Because of a hack we shouldn't have national health care???

[DC Tom]

 

North Korea possibly behind global cyberattack, researchers say

By Ryan Gaydos Published May 16, 2017 Fox News

Cyber security researchers said Monday they may be able to link North Korea to the unprecedented global cyberattack that took more than 300,000 computers hostage in 150 countries last week.

Symantec and Kaspersky Lab said that some of the code used in the version of the WannaCry software had also been used in programs run by the North Korea-linked Lazarus Group.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/05/16/north-korea-possibly-behind-global-cyberattack-researchers-say.html

 

 

It makes sense. Only the DPRK could manage a ransomware attack so ineptly that they take a net loss on it...

[mead107]

Who does windows. If you come do them I will buy you lunch.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

It makes sense. Only the DPRK could manage a ransomware attack so ineptly that they take a net loss on it...

[Foxx]

Another large-scale cyberattack underway: experts

 

Another large-scale, stealthy cyberattack is underway on a scale that could dwarf last week's assault on computers worldwide, a global cybersecurity firm told AFP on Wednesday.

 

The new attack targets the same vulnerabilities the WannaCry ransomware worm exploited but, rather than freeze files, uses the hundreds of thousands of computers believed to have been infected to mine virtual currency.

 

Following the detection of the WannaCry attack on Friday, researchers at Proofpoint discovered a new attack linked to WannaCry called Adylkuzz, said Nicolas Godier, a researcher at the computer security firm.

 

"It uses the hacking tools recently disclosed by the NSA and which have since been fixed by Microsoft in a more stealthy manner and for a different purpose," he said.

 

Instead of completely disabling an infected computer by encrypting data and seeking a ransom payment, Adylkuzz uses the machines it infects to "mine" in a background task a virtual currency, Monero, and transfer the money created to the authors of the virus. ...

Edited May 17, 2017 by Foxx

[OCinBuffalo]

Because of a hack we shouldn't have national health care???

Yeah. But not because of 1 hack. No, multiple hacks. Hacks that occupy positions in the NHS, the political hacks like you that keep ignoring its massive failures and telling us that no, really, we want NHS because "it'll be good for us".

 

Hacks that can't get a real IT job, so they work for the government. Hacks that only have their job because they worked for a politician's campaign. Those hacks who get their political appointment turned into a career job. Manger Hacks who demand a large salary, which in turns demands a requisite workforce for them to manage, which is populated by hacks(I got my job because of social justice).

 

Hacks in the media who refuse to investigate any of this, thus leading to: a completely unwarranted sense of competency amongst the hacks in government, which leads to arrogance, which leads to bad decision and worse design patterns, which leads to how the F the entire NHS gets hacked by a single intrusion.

 

No. It's not a single hack. There had to be lots of prior hacks, both people and ideology, combined, long before a hacker comes along and exploits it. And remember, most hacking is done with social engineering. Contrary to TV: the IT fluent in the real world don't "break their encryption" just in time for the commercial break...because they can't. Nobody can. The NSA can't break most encryption. No, hackers are much more likely to take advantage of the easily exploitable fools the government has seen fit to hire, and get their authentication details via guile.

 

Which, by definition, is dependent upon: hacks.

Edited May 24, 2017 by OCinBuffalo