Well now. Not crypto mining here. So safe to say those that do not mine are "safe" from this nasty bug?!?

DeskStar:

Well now. Not crypto mining here. So safe to say those that do not mine are "safe" from this nasty bug?!?

You're not safe even if you don't mine. Cryptojacking infects the host computer and leeches onto your system, in most cases the GPU to mine in the background without your consent

Godeau:

You're not safe even if you don't mine. Cryptojacking infects the host computer and leeches onto your system, in most cases the GPU to mine in the background without your consent

Interesting indeed. So I wonder if this was part of the recent windows update. Something to mitigate this known issue?

Who does benefit most from malware attacks against old windows?

Fox2232:

Who does benefit most from malware attacks against old windows?

I'd love to know myself.

hehe "lucifer" gotta admit i love that netflix series xD then again watch out peeps 🙂

Fox2232:

Who does benefit most from malware attacks against old windows?

Why Windows? : because it is the most used OS on computer Why old Windows? : because on new one there is more door closed and it is more secured (and most Windows are not updated too) So it's an easy target, most hacker have a real life too, so it's a gain of time to enjoy the gain.

zhalonia:

hehe "lucifer" gotta admit i love that netflix series xD then again watch out peeps 🙂

the comic book that this series is based on, is really great too (DC Comics). btw only the season 4 is a netflix serie (and it's the worse lol) original were from the fox (and were great)

rl66:

Why Windows? : because it is the most used OS on computer Why old Windows? : because on new one there is more door closed and it is more secured (and most Windows are not updated too) So it's an easy target, most hacker have a real life too, so it's a gain of time to enjoy the gain.

That's really not an answer to my rhetorical question. And none was needed.

Fox2232:

That's really not an answer to my rhetorical question. And none was needed.

You are basically saying that you want your preconception to keep existing, unchanged and that you demand some sort of protection from being responded to, and getting corrected. Your "rethorical question" was so obvious, cliche, conspiratorial and biased that the polite answer you got was less than you deserve. Also you could had at least take 1, only 1 further step and ask yourself: "Who does benefit most from malware attacks against new windows?" "Who does benefit most from malware attacks against any windows?", etc, and prevent the fallacy...but that wouldn't fit your prejudice. You must protect your prejudices... Come on. Having your suspicions and mention them is fine, but saying that those shouldn't be corrected or challenged, that you shouldn't get any response for them, and saying isn't an answer when it obviously is, adressing what you said, is beyond entitled, absurd and truth-hating fanaticism.

Fox2232:

That's really not an answer to my rhetorical question. And none was needed.

Then more clearly: the people that use the malware, for it's own benefit. Most of the time the one who made it sell it to other (less risky on time).

Fergutor:

You are basically saying that you want your preconception to keep existing, unchanged and that you demand some sort of protection from being responded to, and getting corrected. Your "rethorical question" was so obvious, cliche, conspiratorial and biased that the polite answer you got was less than you deserve. Also you could had at least take 1, only 1 further step and ask yourself: "Who does benefit most from malware attacks against new windows?" "Who does benefit most from malware attacks against any windows?", etc, and prevent the fallacy...but that wouldn't fit your prejudice. You must protect your prejudices... Come on. Having your suspicions and mention them is fine, but saying that those shouldn't be corrected or challenged, that you shouldn't get any response for them, and saying isn't an answer when it obviously is, adressing what you said, is beyond entitled, absurd and truth-hating fanaticism.

Is your post of any relevance to mine below? Bold parts = not even a bit. Rest is just conjecture on your side. A complete mental construct based on your own thinking. My post did work perfectly for you, as it was meant to let people think. What you did think about are just your own thoughts. I did not put them into your head. And I did underline parts that are borderline psychotic. Go look into mirror and start thinking about person you are. And if you really want to react way you do.

Fox2232:

Who does benefit most from malware attacks against old windows?

Fox2232:

That's really not an answer to my rhetorical question. And none was needed.

Edit: Oh I see now. It has been twice I forgot your name. And third time you went all ballistic on me. Keep triggering yourself. I'll apparently keep forgetting you...

One can easily argue that the ones who benefit the most for any security hole would be those individuals and governments looking to obtain valuable information. Identity theft is a massive problem and those who profit range anywhere from a cyber bank robber that empties bank accounts, to illegal aliens who use stolen social security numbers to work. There are plenty of unproven solutions to stop such crimes, one of which is the biometric microchip (or whatever they're called now) which has an interesting connection to the founder of the previously unmentioned company everyone seems intent to avoid saying. What better way to solve the security holes in your own software than to convince governments that everyone needs a "digital certificate" implanted under their skin which will do everything from give vaccination info, payment authentication, banking info (no need for currency), and proof of identity. Sounds great huh? Not so fast. How annoyed were you guys when drinking straws, plastic bags, sugary sodas, etc were taken away? With such a system they can just be 'big brother' and prevent you from purchasing such things becuase "its for your own good". Or how a half dozen US governors partnered with social media to shut down anti-lockdown protests, or destroyed tens of thousands of small businesses with their extended shut downs, where if you opened your business license was revoked. Or how pot shops and liquor stores and all the big box stores were open for business yet every small bussiness wasn't allowed. Sounds crazy huh? This isn't just theory, it's reality in some places. Lucifer? You mean Bill Gates?

Fox2232:

Is your post of any relevance to mine below? Bold parts = not even a bit. Rest is just conjecture on your side. A complete mental construct based on your own thinking. My post did work perfectly for you, as it was meant to let people think. What you did think about are just your own thoughts. I did not put them into your head. And I did underline parts that are borderline psychotic. Go look into mirror and start thinking about person you are. And if you really want to react way you do. Edit: Oh I see now. It has been twice I forgot your name. And third time you went all ballistic on me. Keep triggering yourself. I'll apparently keep forgetting you...

Whoosh Well, at least given the insane level of projection you are displaying, you may be improving! ...Of course completely ignoring the absolute complete cognitive failure, unjustified self aggrandizing (what a surprise...) and shameful fallacy that your whole response to me is. Hey, repeat all that to yourself, see what you get (I bet nothing). But hey, don't worry, as always all the silence from all the cowards will serve you as approval which will keep allowing you to go on with your insanity. So keep it up and keep showing it, one reason free speech must be protected!