Anonymous-OS is Fake, Packed with Trojans, Says AnonOps

[nukemaster]

Linux is not immune to any form of malware. No software is. Tell me how someone could not take Linux source code and build keyloggers or anything else directly into the OS.

In fact, this actually proves what I have thought for a long time, that open source is potentially more dangerous. You can't have a trojan wrapped version of Windows because Windows is closed source and for someone to do that they would have to steal the source code from Microsoft where as being open source, Linux code is freely available to anyone.

Not quite true. Many illegal copies of windows had extra software(Trojan, Key-loggers, ect) added to them. They had it all setup to run on start up(or even hidden in activation patches) and after all was said and done, it was no better then this.

Clearly legit copy of windows will not have this issue, but neither will a normal copy of Linux.

 

[halcyon]

Unless you're in IT Security and you're just check'n this out in a sandboxed environment noone but a dumb-@$$ would download an OS that could be in any way, shape, or form even loosely associated with a hacker group. Did IQ's just drop while I was asleep?

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]nukemaster[/nom]Not quite true. Many illegal copies of windows had extra software(Trojan, Key-loggers, ect) added to them. They had it all setup to run on start up(or even hidden in activation patches) and after all was said and done, it was no better then this. Clearly legit copy of windows will not have this issue, but neither will a normal copy of Linux.[/citation]
Big difference. Those were legitimate copies of windows burned onto extra disks with extra software added in, not built into the OS itself. Can't be done with Windows since it's closed source unless the source code is stolen.

With Linux, anyone can build malware directly inside the core OS files themselves. That is the difference.

 

[digitalrazoe]

~I knew it was a rotten fish when I read the announcement this morning... Oh well .. 25,000 suckers and counting.

 

[PreferLinux]

[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]Big difference. Those were legitimate copies of windows burned onto extra disks with extra software added in, not built into the OS itself. Can't be done with Windows since it's closed source unless the source code is stolen.With Linux, anyone can build malware directly inside the core OS files themselves. That is the difference.[/citation]
Yes, but how many idiots can you manage to get to use your version? I can easily write a Windows program that will do all sorts of damage too, and it will be no easier to get it on to systems than your custom Linux. And there is really no difference in the end anyway.

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]Big difference. Those were legitimate copies of windows burned onto extra disks with extra software added in, not built into the OS itself. Can't be done with Windows since it's closed source unless the source code is stolen.With Linux, anyone can build malware directly inside the core OS files themselves. That is the difference.[/citation]

Here's my rule of thumb.

Nothing is read-only. If it can be written, then it can be edited.

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]Here's my rule of thumb.Nothing is read-only. If it can be written, then it can be edited.[/citation]
Please, tell us how Windows can have it's source code unaltered, at the very least close to the ease that Linux can that it would make it worth a hackers time to try.

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]PreferLinux[/nom]Yes, but how many idiots can you manage to get to use your version? I can easily write a Windows program that will do all sorts of damage too, and it will be no easier to get it on to systems than your custom Linux. And there is really no difference in the end anyway.[/citation]
Look at some of the comments in this section by people who think it's interesting. Besides, considering how widely Linux is distributed, I don't think that it would be that difficult, especially if Linux's market share increased.

You're also comparing a Windows program to the Linux OS. Apples and oranges. Sorry, but open source has the security vulnerability of being, well, open source, that closed source doesn't. This article shines a light on something. People like you have said for a long time that something like this would never happen, but yet, here it is.

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]Please, tell us how Windows can have it's source code unaltered, at the very least close to the ease that Linux can that it would make it worth a hackers time to try.[/citation]

I find it hard to believe that you can lock a piece of code. A programmer has quite a bit of power over a piece of software when it isn't running. It's a lot harder to rewrite the source code when the software is running, than to rewrite it and load it to a P2P site or to CDs.

 

[tokencode]

If you're dumb enouhg to run this OS, you deserve what you get.


BTW how can a group that allows anyone to claim membership and has no leaders deny that they are responsible for something? If the person who made this claims to be anon, aren't they? Yet another problem anonymity causes when claiming responsibility.

 

[cookoy]

for some 25000, common sense is an elusive thing

 

[JOSHSKORN]

So it's SLIGHTLY more secure than Windows Vista?

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]JOSHSKORN[/nom]So it's SLIGHTLY more secure than Windows Vista?[/citation]

You trade slight security with slightly better security, but you get to sleep with pre-installed malware. What a great trade-off.

 

[Guest]

@wildkitten

you dont need it to be open source, using windows PE (preinstall environment) you can slipstream drivers and software directly into the windows installation routine itself (and with modern DVD there's a whole bunch of space for that, you dont need it to be on separate disk), it's basically what HP and Dell (as well as big corporations who have to handle multiple install) does with their windows setup disk and yes you would have to be a special kind of idiot to use one of these custom windows installation packages if you dont know where it came from, but then i have to point out you also have to be a special kind of idiot to install an unknown Linux distro

open source or close source is irrelevant, where it comes form is most important

 

[mr_wobbles]

[citation][nom]sardonicjester[/nom]Wow. I really hope you are being sarcastic.[/citation]
Its called a troll. They exist quite prominently here.

 

[fixxxer113]

[citation][nom]halcyon[/nom]Unless you're in IT Security and you're just check'n this out in a sandboxed environment noone but a dumb-@$$ would download an OS that could be in any way, shape, or form even loosely associated with a hacker group. Did IQ's just drop while I was asleep?[/citation]

That's the first thing I thought when I read the article... Seriously, with all the news you hear about botnets made from people's PCs without them even knowing, how on earth would you trust an OS actually made by a hacker group, let alone one as flakey as Anonymous. The very nature of their organization is that they're not really....organized. Anyone can say that they are acting or speaking on behalf of the group, wich includes other hackers, harmless script kiddies, but maybe even government organizations and law enforcement...

Plus, based on all that, the group themselves can always deny something they actually did, with the excuse that it was someone just using their name. I fully support cyber-activism (not just causing damage for "t3h 1U1z"), but this group is not worth anyone's support.

 

[back_by_demand]

25000 idiots trying to be hacker-cool

Just got pwnd!!!

 

[Guest]

We still have fools and always will looking for that "free" stuff. Nothing against Linux but stick with
distributions you know are valid.

 

[back_by_demand]

Next week the Bank Of Nigeria is releasing it's own Linux Distro

 

[nikorr]

Next week the Bank Of Nigeria is releasing it's own Linux Distro

😀 😀 😀

 

[deck]

@ Wildkitten

It is apparent you have no idea what you are talking about.

Open source code may be easier to alter, but that does not mean it is easier to get that altered code on to someone's computer.

"With Linux, anyone can build malware directly inside the core OS files themselves. "

But the end user still has to be stupid enough to install your software. It is just as easy to introduce malicious software to a windows machine. The vast majority of security vulnerabilities come down to the ignorance of the end user.

 

[captaincharisma]

@captaincharisma

MacOS, iOS, Android and not to mention literally all firewalls and routers OS are all based off Linux, i guess the world is just full of dumb folks

someone has to learn how to take a joke. are all linux fanboi's this sensitive?

 

[Guest]

@captaincharisma

actually i only ever use Linux to cook some android mods, my current preferred poison is windows 8 CP. There was once a time when jokes and sarcasm was easy to discern in this place, but there are some real fanatics out there who actually believe what you wrote, so my question is are all fanatics this sensitive?

😛

 

[captaincharisma]

the words fanatics and sensitive seem to go hand in hand. i am currently am using a Nexus S with gingerbread so i would be a hypocrite if i was not joking

 

[obsama1]

Should have been called AnonymuOS.

/bad pun