Re: Cryptolocker vs MalwareBytes AntiMalware - Page 2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View

Re: Cryptolocker vs MalwareBytes AntiMalware

Dustin wrote:
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I'm telling him that your code isin't worth shit unless it gets to run
on a target computer.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I don't give a shit about what you could or couldn't "teach" anyone.

I'm telling you that the NT line of Windows was and is a basket case
when it comes to remote code execution vulnerabilities compared to
win-9x/me.

Re: Cryptolocker vs MalwareBytes AntiMalware

Virus Guy formulated on Tuesday :
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yeah, I knew where you were headed with this.



Re: Cryptolocker vs MalwareBytes AntiMalware


Quoted text here. Click to load it

What code would be?  
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

You're asking to learn it.  
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sadly, you're an idiot and don't know how to write code. Malicious or non  
malicious, so you'll have to excuse me if I discount your opinion (which is  
baseless) when it comes to remote code execution vulnerabilities available  
for win9x machines. Are you discounting the java issues? Java isn't NT  
specific. last I checked, your ancient OS could still run Java, right?

  



--  
Take it easy... Don't let the sound of your own wheels drive you crazy.  
Lighten up while you still can. Don't even try to understand.  
Just find a place to make your stand and take it easy!


Re: Cryptolocker vs MalwareBytes AntiMalware

Virus Guy has brought this to us :
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The ability to obtain and run user's choice programs is exactly what an  
OS is supposed to do.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The fact that a malicious program can rename files with characters that  
the file browser doesn't work with - effectively keeping the user from  
accessing them - and the only thing it can't do that it tries to do is  
give the user a message about paying to have them accessible again,  
doesn't mean that the malware doesn't work. It is ransomware because it  
was designed to ask for ransom.

A virus with worm capabilities, running in an environment that doesn't  
support the worm functions, doesn't magically cease being a virus. As  
long as it is capable of reproducing and attaching to code, it remains  
a virus.

Much of what qualifies as exploit code for NT based systems, is using  
an exploit to get around hurdles that Win9x doesn't even present to an  
attacker - and you use that as proof that Win9x is more secure. Your  
questions are just another ploy that you use to expound your stupidity.



Re: Cryptolocker vs MalwareBytes AntiMalware

@news2.open-news-network.org:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

It's frightening to think this guy is in charge of anything besides his own  
computers, isn't it?  


--  
Take it easy... Don't let the sound of your own wheels drive you crazy.  
Lighten up while you still can. Don't even try to understand.  
Just find a place to make your stand and take it easy!


Re: Cryptolocker vs MalwareBytes AntiMalware

Dustin explained on 4/16/2014 :
Quoted text here. Click to load it

<Shudders>



Re: Cryptolocker vs MalwareBytes AntiMalware


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Like most Malware, it only has to be executed once. it'll do the rest.
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Umm.. Irok isn't a batch file. it doesn't do delete *.*


--  
Take it easy... Don't let the sound of your own wheels drive you crazy.  
Lighten up while you still can. Don't even try to understand.  
Just find a place to make your stand and take it easy!


Site Timeline