Got Adobe Reader? Worry.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/...intsrc=hm_list

From the article:

"The next day, Wednesday, Belgian security researcher Didier Stevens
said he also had crafted an exploit that triggers the bug without
requiring JavaScript, and backed up his claim by publicly posting
proof-of-concept attack code. His exploit works in the background, and
doesn't require that a user actually open a malformed PDF file."

Alias

"Alias" <> wrote in message
news:gouft1$fsa$...
> http://www.computerworld.com/action/...intsrc=hm_list
>
> From the article:
>
> "The next day, Wednesday, Belgian security researcher Didier Stevens said
> he also had crafted an exploit that triggers the bug without requiring
> JavaScript, and backed up his claim by publicly posting proof-of-concept
> attack code. His exploit works in the background, and doesn't require that
> a user actually open a malformed PDF file."
>
> Alias

You are really grasping at straws. If you have an up to date antivirus on
your machine you will be fine. If you use some piece of **** OS Ubuntu for
example, you can't do any work because Ubuntu isn't compatable with the
popular programs out there.

Ubuntu was written by geeks for geeks who can't get laid.

Imagine, Ubuntu is FREE and NOBODY wants it.

"Alias" <> wrote in message
news:gouft1$fsa$...
> http://www.computerworld.com/action/...intsrc=hm_list
>
> From the article:
>
> "The next day, Wednesday, Belgian security researcher Didier Stevens said
> he also had crafted an exploit

What exactly are the details on this "exploit"?

> that triggers the bug without requiring JavaScript, and backed up his
> claim by publicly posting proof-of-concept attack code. His exploit works
> in the background, and doesn't require that a user actually open a
> malformed PDF file."
>
> Alias

"webster72n" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> "Alias" <> wrote in message
> news:gouft1$fsa$...
>> http://www.computerworld.com/action/...intsrc=hm_list
>>
>> From the article:
>>
>> "The next day, Wednesday, Belgian security researcher Didier Stevens said
>> he also had crafted an exploit
>
> What exactly are the details on this "exploit"?
>
>> that triggers the bug without requiring JavaScript, and backed up his
>> claim by publicly posting proof-of-concept attack code. His exploit works
>> in the background, and doesn't require that a user actually open a
>> malformed PDF file."
>>
>> Alias
>


It's another of these warnings where the user can get an exploit but the
conditions are beyond reasonable use. Foxit is a better PDF reader anyway..


--
Mike Hall - MVP

Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

I agree about Foxit is a better pdf reader. What I like most about Foxit is
it uses less memory. Compare to what Adobe reader uses.

"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote:

>"webster72n" <> wrote in message
>news:...
>>
>> "Alias" <> wrote in message
>> news:gouft1$fsa$...
>>> http://www.computerworld.com/action/...intsrc=hm_list
>>>
>>> From the article:
>>>
>>> "The next day, Wednesday, Belgian security researcher Didier Stevens said
>>> he also had crafted an exploit
>>
>> What exactly are the details on this "exploit"?
>>
>>> that triggers the bug without requiring JavaScript, and backed up his
>>> claim by publicly posting proof-of-concept attack code. His exploit works
>>> in the background, and doesn't require that a user actually open a
>>> malformed PDF file."
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>
>
>It's another of these warnings where the user can get an exploit but the
>conditions are beyond reasonable use. Foxit is a better PDF reader anyway..

Only if you don't care what the file looks like when you read it. I
stopped using alternatives to Acrobat reader when I realized how
crappy some renderings were with them.

"Ravenshadow" <> wrote:

>I agree about Foxit is a better pdf reader. What I like most about Foxit is
>it uses less memory. Compare to what Adobe reader uses.

That, and the speed at which it loads are two good reasons for using
it, but I prefer the appearance of PDF files when read with Acrobat
Reader.

Besides, most systems today have plenty of RAM and are fast enough so
that those features are really just something that techies get
enthused about. SOME techies. Not this one.

"Mike Torello" <> wrote in message
news:...
> "Ravenshadow" <> wrote:
>
>>I agree about Foxit is a better pdf reader. What I like most about Foxit
>>is
>>it uses less memory. Compare to what Adobe reader uses.
>
> That, and the speed at which it loads are two good reasons for using
> it, but I prefer the appearance of PDF files when read with Acrobat
> Reader.
>
> Besides, most systems today have plenty of RAM and are fast enough so
> that those features are really just something that techies get
> enthused about. SOME techies. Not this one.

My PC has AMD 64 X2 3800+ with 3GB DDR2. I still enjoy running foxit compare
to the other one. Planning on upgrading the processor to a AMD 64 X2 5600+
soon. Which is close to max this mobo can handle. Which will be good enough
for my needs.

Spanky deMonkey, OB/GYN wrote:
>
> "Alias" <> wrote in message
> news:gouft1$fsa$...
>> http://www.computerworld.com/action/...intsrc=hm_list
>>
>>
>> From the article:
>>
>> "The next day, Wednesday, Belgian security researcher Didier Stevens
>> said he also had crafted an exploit that triggers the bug without
>> requiring JavaScript, and backed up his claim by publicly posting
>> proof-of-concept attack code. His exploit works in the background, and
>> doesn't require that a user actually open a malformed PDF file."
>>
>> Alias
>
> You are really grasping at straws. If you have an up to date antivirus
> on your machine you will be fine.

Chuckle. It's not a virus, dumb ****.

Snip the usual copy and paste bullshit.

Alias

Frank wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>> Spanky deMonkey, OB/GYN wrote:
>>>
>>> "Alias" <> wrote in message
>>> news:gouft1$fsa$...
>>>> http://www.computerworld.com/action/...intsrc=hm_list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From the article:
>>>>
>>>> "The next day, Wednesday, Belgian security researcher Didier Stevens
>>>> said he also had crafted an exploit that triggers the bug without
>>>> requiring JavaScript, and backed up his claim by publicly posting
>>>> proof-of-concept attack code. His exploit works in the background,
>>>> and doesn't require that a user actually open a malformed PDF file."
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>> You are really grasping at straws. If you have an up to date
>>> antivirus on your machine you will be fine.
>>
>> Chuckle. It's not a virus, dumb ****.
>>
>> Snip the usual copy and paste bullshit.
>>
>> Alias
>
> chuckle...you too can get it using linux/adobe reader!

No Adobe reader in my Linux install.

> Oops!

You were saying?

> Fukk you are stupid and you're just dumb enough to actually have an
> infected computer and not even know it!...LOL!

See above.

> What lying POS loser you are!

Projecting again, eh?

Alias