| 1 |
I'm putting this in a separate thread because IMHO it has nothing to do |
| 2 |
with any problems I'm having, but with desktop security in general. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 09:57 +0100, Roman Zilka wrote: |
| 5 |
> The third suggestion is probably the most important one: being NAT'd |
| 6 |
> and being behind any iptables configuration (that allows for operations |
| 7 |
> such as sending mail and browsing the web) doesn't make your PC |
| 8 |
> invulnerable or anything near that. In other words, active break-in |
| 9 |
> attempts via open ports is by far not the only option hackers have. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
So give me an example, Roman, assuming one's firewall is intact and |
| 12 |
functioning as designed. The only such class of possible exploits I can |
| 13 |
think of is the possibility of importing a virus, trojan, worm, etc. via |
| 14 |
email, or possibly via a web script. Linux viruses propagated via email |
| 15 |
are scarcer than hen's teeth, and an exploit imported thusly which would |
| 16 |
leverage a vulnerability in a specific problem kernel is almost |
| 17 |
certainly rare enough to be considered nonexistent in the wild as a |
| 18 |
practical matter. Please cite specific viruses/trojans, and if you can, |
| 19 |
reported cases of such exploits. In other words, don't blow smoke at me |
| 20 |
or throw out generalized assertions without citing evidence to support |
| 21 |
them. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Lindsay Haisley |"Windows ..... |
| 25 |
FMP Computer Services | life's too short!" |
| 26 |
512-259-1190 | |
| 27 |
http://www.fmp.com | - Brad Johnston |
Archives