|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > full-disclosure-uk archives|
J. Oquendo wrote:
> You're mistaking the foundation of why I wrote it...
> If you were an attacker what would you rather have?
> 10k Linux machines
> 10k Windows machines
why, Windows machines of course, I'm an attacker, not a fool! If you were a terrorist, what would you rather do?
Crash the Twin Towers
Crash the dollar
There is no such thing as an "attacker". All actions, even such an individual's, are driven by economical considerations. Your "attacker" seems to be some kind of space alien hacker (or possibly the Unamomber), as detached and... alienated as it is from this world. You hint at a sci-fi epic scenario, with an unstoppable army of Linux bots targetting vital points of the Internet infrastructure with aimed attacks. Even putting your nonsensical premises aside (like the wishful assumption that operating systems are *not* commodities, and to add to the absurdity we are talking about zombies here!), you are still left with an one-man fuck-the-world scheme with no winner. Why would anyone do that? So bravo and yay, a shell script trojan and vague threats of MD5 collisions, history books here you come! Now all you need is a(n) hero's death. I can already see the epitaph: "Nobody was faster in the awk"