In article <4826e330$0$6430$834e42db@reader.greatnowhere.com>,
 kmwkawrt@yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> commander meridia par mail

I don't normally reply to spam, but I think it's worth cautioning 
anybody who might be tempted that this drug, also known as sibutramine 
and Reductil is not safe to take without medical supervision and is 
probably more dangerous than the condition it purports to treat.

Alwyn

On Sun, 11 May 2008 07:28:33 -0700 (PDT), Ken 
wrote:

>On May 11, 5:57 am, Alwyn  wrote:
>> In article <4826e330$0$6430$834e4...@reader.greatnowhere.com>,
>>
>>  kmwka...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> > commander meridia par mail
>>
>> I don't normally reply to spam, but I think it's worth cautioning
>> anybody who might be tempted that this drug, also known as sibutramine
>> and Reductil is not safe to take without medical supervision and is
>> probably more dangerous than the condition it purports to treat.
>>
>> Alwyn
>
>There's only one dumb ass in here who would fall for this spam

You might be surprised.

A few years ago one of the long standing loonies in alt.atheism
installed a "Microsoft security update" he got in his email.

Which looked at his Usenet spool, his email files, his address book
and anywhere else it could fine addresses. 

Then sent 140k copies of itself to every occurrence of every address
it could find. Over and over again.

My 20mb email spool at my ISP would fill up in about 40 minutes in
what amounted to a denial of service attack on every poster in every
newsgroup he infested.

Of course the ISP's tech support people were no help, telling anybody
who complained to install an anti-virus as though that were the
problem.

It took a couple of weeks before I finally got through to a techie who
realised it was happening on their machine not their users.

So they finally installed the filters they should have done long
before.

And the perpetrator whined that it wasn't his fault, he thought it was
a genuine security update.

Never underestimate the stupidity of these loonies.

Ken wrote:
> On May 11, 7:49 am, Christopher A. Lee  wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 May 2008 07:28:33 -0700 (PDT), Ken 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On May 11, 5:57 am, Alwyn  wrote:
>>>> In article <4826e330$0$6430$834e4...@reader.greatnowhere.com>,
>>
>>>> kmwka...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>>>> commander meridia par mail
>>
>>>> I don't normally reply to spam, but I think it's worth cautioning
>>>> anybody who might be tempted that this drug, also known as
>>>> sibutramine and Reductil is not safe to take without medical
>>>> supervision and is probably more dangerous than the condition it
>>>> purports to treat.
>>
>>>> Alwyn
>>
>>> There's only one dumb ass in here who would fall for this spam
>>
>> You might be surprised.
>>
>> A few years ago one of the long standing loonies in alt.atheism
>> installed a "Microsoft security update" he got in his email.
>>
>> Which looked at his Usenet spool, his email files, his address book
>> and anywhere else it could fine addresses.
>>
>> Then sent 140k copies of itself to every occurrence of every address
>> it could find. Over and over again.
>>
>> My 20mb email spool at my ISP would fill up in about 40 minutes in
>> what amounted to a denial of service attack on every poster in every
>> newsgroup he infested.
>>
>> Of course the ISP's tech support people were no help, telling anybody
>> who complained to install an anti-virus as though that were the
>> problem.
>>
>> It took a couple of weeks before I finally got through to a techie
>> who realised it was happening on their machine not their users.
>>
>> So they finally installed the filters they should have done long
>> before.
>>
>> And the perpetrator whined that it wasn't his fault, he thought it
>> was a genuine security update.
>>
>> Never underestimate the stupidity of these loonies.
>
> Yep
> Dumb asses are everywhere.
> AmeriKKK no longer has a monopoly on 'em.
> BTW....wondering if Dimwit's installed that security patch yet?

What's the betting that Dimwit doesn't install genuine patches from M$ 
Update, thinks Vista SP1 is a virus, doesn't update his AV or run any 
firewall, and has no anti-spyware? (- Or any combination of any number of 
these between 1 of them and all of them.)

-- 
http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
Personalised Desktop Computers

On Sun, 11 May 2008 23:18:26 +0100, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
<femail@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

>Ken wrote:
>> On May 11, 7:49 am, Christopher A. Lee  wrote:
>>> On Sun, 11 May 2008 07:28:33 -0700 (PDT), Ken 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On May 11, 5:57 am, Alwyn  wrote:
>>>>> In article <4826e330$0$6430$834e4...@reader.greatnowhere.com>,
>>>
>>>>> kmwka...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> commander meridia par mail
>>>
>>>>> I don't normally reply to spam, but I think it's worth cautioning
>>>>> anybody who might be tempted that this drug, also known as
>>>>> sibutramine and Reductil is not safe to take without medical
>>>>> supervision and is probably more dangerous than the condition it
>>>>> purports to treat.
>>>
>>>>> Alwyn
>>>
>>>> There's only one dumb ass in here who would fall for this spam
>>>
>>> You might be surprised.
>>>
>>> A few years ago one of the long standing loonies in alt.atheism
>>> installed a "Microsoft security update" he got in his email.
>>>
>>> Which looked at his Usenet spool, his email files, his address book
>>> and anywhere else it could fine addresses.
>>>
>>> Then sent 140k copies of itself to every occurrence of every address
>>> it could find. Over and over again.
>>>
>>> My 20mb email spool at my ISP would fill up in about 40 minutes in
>>> what amounted to a denial of service attack on every poster in every
>>> newsgroup he infested.
>>>
>>> Of course the ISP's tech support people were no help, telling anybody
>>> who complained to install an anti-virus as though that were the
>>> problem.
>>>
>>> It took a couple of weeks before I finally got through to a techie
>>> who realised it was happening on their machine not their users.
>>>
>>> So they finally installed the filters they should have done long
>>> before.
>>>
>>> And the perpetrator whined that it wasn't his fault, he thought it
>>> was a genuine security update.

He even owned up to it, so he must have felt guilty.

>>> Never underestimate the stupidity of these loonies.
>>
>> Yep
>> Dumb asses are everywhere.
>> AmeriKKK no longer has a monopoly on 'em.
>> BTW....wondering if Dimwit's installed that security patch yet?
>
>What's the betting that Dimwit doesn't install genuine patches from M$ 
>Update, thinks Vista SP1 is a virus, doesn't update his AV or run any 
>firewall, and has no anti-spyware? (- Or any combination of any number of 
>these between 1 of them and all of them.)

Wouldn't surprise me.

But IMO it's criminal that Microsoft put out such crappy software that
you need to buy third party products to make your machines safe.

It came as a shock after a lifetime as a mainframe professional on
hack-proof systems using inherently safe hardware and software
architectures.

As did having to reboot after all but a very few software updates. You
usually just had to kill the application you were updating.

But even then you're not always safe.

The supposedly trustworthy site many Americans get their local TV
listings from, let an ad for Colgate through, which had hijacked the
browser with a fake "your computer might have spyware" panel. Clicking
the "close" or "X" took you a web page that "scanned"  the machine.
The only way out of it was to kill the browser from the task manager.

Because my system is kept clean I knew the nasties the "scan" found
weren't there, and I wouldn't have downloaded software I'd never heard
of anyway, it stopped there.

But the hijack could have done anything. A net.expert found what was
happenning, and it was a bit scary - a java script had been written to
deliberately bypass normal security and could have done anything.

But you're supposed to be able to trust reputable sites.

http://www.castlecops.com/p1085408-Zap2It_hijacked_by_spywaredestructor.html

Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Sun, 11 May 2008 23:18:26 +0100, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
> <femail@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Ken wrote:
>>> On May 11, 7:49 am, Christopher A. Lee  wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 11 May 2008 07:28:33 -0700 (PDT), Ken 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On May 11, 5:57 am, Alwyn  wrote:
>>>>>> In article <4826e330$0$6430$834e4...@reader.greatnowhere.com>,
>>>>
>>>>>> kmwka...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> commander meridia par mail
>>>>
>>>>>> I don't normally reply to spam, but I think it's worth cautioning
>>>>>> anybody who might be tempted that this drug, also known as
>>>>>> sibutramine and Reductil is not safe to take without medical
>>>>>> supervision and is probably more dangerous than the condition it
>>>>>> purports to treat.
>>>>
>>>>>> Alwyn
>>>>
>>>>> There's only one dumb ass in here who would fall for this spam
>>>>
>>>> You might be surprised.
>>>>
>>>> A few years ago one of the long standing loonies in alt.atheism
>>>> installed a "Microsoft security update" he got in his email.
>>>>
>>>> Which looked at his Usenet spool, his email files, his address book
>>>> and anywhere else it could fine addresses.
>>>>
>>>> Then sent 140k copies of itself to every occurrence of every
>>>> address it could find. Over and over again.
>>>>
>>>> My 20mb email spool at my ISP would fill up in about 40 minutes in
>>>> what amounted to a denial of service attack on every poster in
>>>> every newsgroup he infested.
>>>>
>>>> Of course the ISP's tech support people were no help, telling
>>>> anybody who complained to install an anti-virus as though that
>>>> were the problem.
>>>>
>>>> It took a couple of weeks before I finally got through to a techie
>>>> who realised it was happening on their machine not their users.
>>>>
>>>> So they finally installed the filters they should have done long
>>>> before.
>>>>
>>>> And the perpetrator whined that it wasn't his fault, he thought it
>>>> was a genuine security update.
>
> He even owned up to it, so he must have felt guilty.
>
>>>> Never underestimate the stupidity of these loonies.
>>>
>>> Yep
>>> Dumb asses are everywhere.
>>> AmeriKKK no longer has a monopoly on 'em.
>>> BTW....wondering if Dimwit's installed that security patch yet?
>>
>> What's the betting that Dimwit doesn't install genuine patches from
>> M$ Update, thinks Vista SP1 is a virus, doesn't update his AV or run
>> any firewall, and has no anti-spyware? (- Or any combination of any
>> number of these between 1 of them and all of them.)
>
> Wouldn't surprise me.
>
> But IMO it's criminal that Microsoft put out such crappy software that
> you need to buy third party products to make your machines safe.

Mmmm...Not necessarily: Maybe I'm better off than some as I'm behind a 
router with a hardware firewall; but I find Windows Firewall is adequate in 
tandem with it. I run XP Pro as I think Vista sucks. I use Avast! antivirus 
and have set Xoftspy SE to scan for nasties at every boot and when updates 
arrive as well as running in the background. I have installed SP3 RTM from 
M$ Update and always d/l the latest patches from M$ Update each Patch 
Tuesday. I keep java updated and patched, stay up to date with the latest 
versions of any software I run, and virus scan any suspicious data. I 
usually re4gularly backup my system to another PC as well as external HDD 
and online backup. I run Diskeeper for automatic drive defragmentation, keep 
the registry optimised and the system tweaked...It's all what I consider to 
be standard basic computer maintenance. If one chooses to run Linux instead 
of M$ software one doesn't really get the chance to do any of that, as 
getting any Linux distro to work efficiently is a miracle in itself IMO, and 
consumes all one's available time.
>
> It came as a shock after a lifetime as a mainframe professional on
> hack-proof systems using inherently safe hardware and software
> architectures.
>
> As did having to reboot after all but a very few software updates. You
> usually just had to kill the application you were updating.

I find that actually depends on the computer to some extent: I've applied 
the exact same M$ updates to several different brands and types of computer 
in the past and although some have said they need a reboot; others have 
completed the update without.
>
> But even then you're not always safe.
>
> The supposedly trustworthy site many Americans get their local TV
> listings from, let an ad for Colgate through, which had hijacked the
> browser with a fake "your computer might have spyware" panel. Clicking
> the "close" or "X" took you a web page that "scanned"  the machine.
> The only way out of it was to kill the browser from the task manager.
>
> Because my system is kept clean I knew the nasties the "scan" found
> weren't there, and I wouldn't have downloaded software I'd never heard
> of anyway, it stopped there.

'Sounds like "Spyware Nuker" - which adds around 32 spyware cookies and 2 
trojans; then "finds" 25 cookies and 1 trojan: Spybot S&D has had that one's 
number for quite a while. I see from the link it's "SpywareDestructor"; 
which IIRC is the former by another name with a slightly different 
signature.
>
> But the hijack could have done anything. A net.expert found what was
> happenning, and it was a bit scary - a java script had been written to
> deliberately bypass normal security and could have done anything.

I think M$/Sun have petched that java vulnerability since.
>
> But you're supposed to be able to trust reputable sites.
>
> http://www.castlecops.com/p1085408-Zap2It_hijacked_by_spywaredestructor.html

'Swings and roundabouts: There is no such thing as *totally* safe computing 
IMO.

-- 
http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
Personalised Desktop Computers