ok, who created the blaster virus and the sobig.f e-mail virus?

[attgig]

I want my $$1/2 mil

http://money.cnn.com/2003/11/05/technology/microsoftbounty/index.htm?cnn=yes

the picture cracks me up:
http://money.cnn.com/2003/11/05/technology/microsoftbounty/gates_virus_bounty.03.jpg



Microsoft: Bounty hunter

The world's No. 1 software company announces a $5M reward program to help catch virus authors.
November 5, 2003: 1:12 PM EST
By Paul R. La Monica, CNN/Money Senior Writer



NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Attention virus writers. Microsoft is putting a bounty on your heads.

The world's largest software company announced Wednesday in Washington that it is creating an anti-virus reward program, backed by $5 million of its cash, to help law enforcement agencies catch the authors of computer worms.

As the first part of the program, Microsoft (MSFT: Research, Estimates) announced two $250,000 rewards, a total of $500,000, for information that leads to the arrest of the writers of two nasty computer worms -- the Blaster worm and SoBig.F e-mail virus -- that crippled many PCs running on the Microsoft Windows operating system this summer. Microsoft did not announce specific plans for the remaining $4.5 million in the reward program.

"These are real crimes that disrupt the lives of real people," said Brad Smith, Microsoft senior vice president and general counsel.

[cruelpupet]

I know who wrote it!!!!


blaster was written by mcafee and sobig was written by norton


case closed, give me my 500k

[bachviet]

Originally posted by cruelpupet
I know who wrote it!!!!


blaster was written by mcafee and sobig was written by norton


case closed, give me my 500k
Here's $0.50 for you.

Bill Gates wants to play sherrif.

[djradam]

this almost sounds like the RIAA in a way...taking things on from the wrong perspective.

yeah, these viruses are NOT good and probably cost a trillion billion dollars in damages, but it helps microsoft realize what THEY need to tweak. i think i read in the article they're suffering bad publicity. well...you know what to fix, learn from your mistakes. make the system better than the last.

viruses are evil, and the writers probably need to be punished because they did cause damage, but they are good in a way too :)


if i turn myself in, do i get the $500,000? i wonder if there are restrictions. what if you wrote the viruses, turned yourself in and SHOULD get the reward , but MS doesn't give you the reward, sue them? :)

[Jeffbx]

Originally posted by djradam
[B]yeah, these viruses are NOT good and probably cost a trillion billion dollars in damages, but it helps microsoft realize what THEY need to tweak. i think i read in the article they're suffering bad publicity. well...you know what to fix, learn from your mistakes. make the system better than the last.
[B]

No, no, no!! Viruses are not a good way of pointing out security flaws any more than breaking into houses is a good way of pointing out securuty flaws. That's a convenient excuse that helps people justify their criminal behavior.

Practically every single OS in production today can be exploited in a number of different ways, and the end result would be the same - lost time, data and productivity.

[Showtime]

I hope they catch those bastirds but we gotta have these things(virus's, etc.). Our whole world depends on computers and if we don't practice safe computing and being proactive in their defense, bad things can happen. It prepares us for the next wave.

Whatever doesn't kill you.............

-jel:halo:

[djradam]

Originally posted by the jello is jigglin
[B]... and if we don't practice safe computing and ....B]


sounds like practicing safe sex, hehe

[InfiniteNothing]

I disagree Jeff. Microsoft products are unusually buggy. Virus protection is easy: Don't run unknown .exe files. But Microsoft is making this too easy. They are not thinking ahead when they introduce a feature. They need to learn to program more responsibly and this flaw essentially teaches them that lesson. Also I'd rather this hole was revealed now with a worm than later with a virus.

[attgig]

yeah yeah yeah...whatever...

i just want my reward money

[Jeffbx]

Originally posted by InfiniteNothing
I disagree Jeff. Microsoft products are unusually buggy. Virus protection is easy: Don't run unknown .exe files. But Microsoft is making this too easy. They are not thinking ahead when they introduce a feature. They need to learn to program more responsibly and this flaw essentially teaches them that lesson. Also I'd rather this hole was revealed now with a worm than later with a virus.

I don't agree - what a lot of people don't realize is that EVERY OS has these vulnerabilities - MS is not unique.

You may ask, then why don't we see viruses on the Mac (UNIX, whatever)? Must be much more secure than Windows!

The reason is that people love to make MS (and MS users) squirm. They're obviously the leader in market share, and if someone is going to exploit a security hole, the'll want to make as much impact as possible.

Let's say Microsoft goes out of business tomorrow & everyone throws away their copies of Windows and switches to UNIX. Viruses are not going to go away... they are going to switch platforms. New security holes will be discovered all over the place, and we'll be in the same boat as we are today.

It's the same reason that the recording industry can't make a secure CD... throw enough hackers at it, and they'll break the security. It's happened time and time again.

Bottom line is that Microsoft's security is no better or worse than any other OS. Yes, they need to patch security holes as they are discovered. No, morons do not need to exploit the security holes by writing viruses. They are distructive, illegal, cause individuals & businesses to lose money, and they do not make MS more vigilant about their code writing.

[InfiniteNothing]

Originally posted by Jeffbx


I don't agree - what a lot of people don't realize is that EVERY OS has these vulnerabilities - MS is not unique.


Can you prove this statement. You make the argument that if enough people were trying to hack say Unix, or OS X that they'd be able to find vulnerabilities and you give them a motive of MS hate or something but I don't know what you are basing this on. You seem to be arguing based on hypothetical evidence. I'd like to think responsible programming could lead to virtually unhackable systems.

[Jeffbx]

Originally posted by InfiniteNothing


Can you prove this statement.

Nope! You're right - it's purely hypothetical on my part. I only base it on watching the industry... my hypothosis it that the more of an install base an OS has, the more likely it will be the target of an attack. I don't think the inherent security (or lack thereof) makes a difference in whether the OS will be exploited. So, my opinion is that viruses are wrong no matter what, and they do no good in forcing a manufacturer to become more secure.

Arguably, they become more secure as they close the security holes that the viruses exploit, but it's certainly not necessary to exploit the vulnerability to get the hole patched. There are a number of 'white hat' organizations that are more than willing to point out the existing security flaws.


Originally posted by InfiniteNothing
I'd like to think responsible programming could lead to virtually unhackable systems.

I'd like to think that too, but I don't think it'll ever happen without an entirely closed system - no internet, no software installs, no network, etc.