Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(February 2003)

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Spam vs. viruses
From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk @ gsp . org>
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 21:11:05 -0500
To: list-managers @ greatcircle . com
In-reply-to: <3E594958 . 9050807 @ queernet . org>
References: <3E583DD9 . 8030705 @ vo . cnchost . com> <5 . 2 . 0 . 9 . 2 . 20030223134226 . 00b6c668 @ pop . earthlink . net> <20030223215658 . GA26615 @ gsp . org> <3E594958 . 9050807 @ queernet . org>
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 02:21:12PM -0800, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
> I am willing to bet that, if Linux actually ever does increase its 
> desktop market share, the number of viruses/worms for it will go up 
> tremendously as well, for two reasons:
> 1) Only critical mass will make anyone care to write them.
> 2) As a more naive user community comes on-board, they will update their 
> systems to reflect security advisories much less frequently than the 
> geekerie do.

You're probably right.  I look forward to sufficient desktop market
share for Linux and the like to enable this prediction to be tested.

However, I didn't specifically mention Linux (preferring OpenBSD myself).
I do note, however, that (a) the last time a Unix/Linux-based virus/worm
had significant operational impact on the Internet was November 3, 1988,
and (b) a key component in its propagation (sendmail) still enjoys quite a
large market share to this day, even though postfix, exim, etc. have
eroded it somewhat.


Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Spam vs. viruses
From: Bob Bish <bobbish @ earthlink . net>
Next: Re: [Fwd: EFF Mailing List Query]
From: "Anne P. Mitchell, Esq." <amitchell @ habeas . com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Spam vs. viruses
From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk @ gsp . org>
Next: Re: Spam vs. viruses
From: J C Lawrence <claw @ kanga . nu>

Search Internet Search