 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] dev null> wrote in message
news:4898b163$1@news.povray.org...
> X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*
LOL, I'm guessing that actually means something, whereas mine didn't.
Thanks for the laugh mate, I needed it. :)
AND I'M NOT CLICKING ON IT!! :op
~Steve~
>
> --
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
> http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 21:44:18 +0100, St. wrote:
> "Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
> news:4898b163$1@news.povray.org...
>
>
>> X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*
>
> LOL, I'm guessing that actually means something, whereas mine didn't.
> Thanks for the laugh mate, I needed it. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eicar_test_file
:-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Henderson" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote in message
news:4898be73@news.povray.org...
> On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 21:44:18 +0100, St. wrote:
>
>> "Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
>> news:4898b163$1@news.povray.org...
>>
>>
>>> X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*
>>
>> LOL, I'm guessing that actually means something, whereas mine didn't.
>> Thanks for the laugh mate, I needed it. :)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eicar_test_file
Haha, thanks Jim, I didn't know that existed. You guys are great.
>
> :-)
:-)
~Steve~
>
> Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 22:46:56 +0100, St. wrote:
> Haha, thanks Jim, I didn't know that existed. You guys are great.
Hehe, GIYF. ;-) But I had seen it before, just didn't know what the
contents actually were. There's also a standard file for testing UCE as
well - used for testing SpamAssassin installations to make sure it's
working. I'd never heard of that one before.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eicar_test_file
>
> Haha, thanks Jim, I didn't know that existed. You guys are great.
Well it's a lot safer than "keeping a collection of real viruses for
test purposes". ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*
>
I'm impressed! Defender actually picked this up. Who knew it had virus
definitions ...
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'defender.jpg' (17 KB)
Preview of image 'defender.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> I'm impressed! Defender actually picked this up. Who knew it had virus
> definitions ...
LOL @ threat level.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:59:31 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eicar_test_file
>>
>> Haha, thanks Jim, I didn't know that existed. You guys are great.
>
> Well it's a lot safer than "keeping a collection of real viruses for
> test purposes". ;-)
Depends on what you want to test. I was using it to test virus
interaction with software; the Eicar test file isn't particularly useful
for that.
But that's another thing that virtualization is great for - sandboxing
for that sort of testing.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:4896fdf4$1@news.povray.org...
>
> All the big names are there - Byte Bandit, Chynoble, Melissa, Code Red,
> SQL Slammer, Sobig, Sober, MyDoom, MS Blaster, Klez, Nachi, etc. Plus
> there's a few I haven't even heard of. (Obviously most of these are PC
> viruses, and it wasn't until the late 90s that I started using that
> platform.)
The interesting (and unfortunate) thing about SQL Slammer is that the patch
that closed the exploit had been released a couple of months before the worm
appeared. The reason is was so widespread is that most organisations hadn't
bothered applying any service packs
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail Shaw wrote:
> The interesting (and unfortunate) thing about SQL Slammer is that the patch
> that closed the exploit had been released a couple of months before the worm
> appeared. The reason is was so widespread is that most organisations hadn't
> bothered applying any service packs
Indeed. Some of these things use a hole that was patched a week or two
ago, but some hit really "old" holes that were fixed ages ago.
OTOH, throwing an update onto a home PC is one thing. I guess you have
to be a tad more careful when it's a production-grade server we're
talking about...
(I don't know how SQL Slammer works, but wouldn't you have to have SQL
access exposed to the Internet for it to propogate?)
Ah well, at least I know why I keep getting all those strange entries in
my web logs... Apparently they're trying to exploit a bug in ISS. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
