Microsoft Shuts Down Rustock Botnet
The takedown relied on legal and technical "measures": Microsoft obtained a court order which enabled it to work with the U.S. Marshals Service "to physically capture evidence" and remove affected servers from hosting companies. The company said that servers were removed from hosters in Kansas City, Scranton, Denver, Dallas, Chicago, Seattle, and Columbus. Upstream providers helped Microsoft to "sever" the I addressed that controlled the botnet, cutting off the communication between the servers and those who operated the botnet. The evidence gathered is now investigated in the hope that Microsoft and government officials learn more how botnets are operated.
In addition, Microsoft filed suit against the anonymous operators of the botnet , based in part on the abuse of Microsoft's trademark in the botnet. Rustock is estimated to have infected well more than 1 million client PCs that are capable of sending billions of spam emails every day. The botnet was known for sending Microsoft lottery scams and fake offers as well as prescription drug spam.
" Although Rustock’s primary use appears to have been to send spam, it’s important to note that a large botnet can be used for almost any cybercrime a bot-herder can dream up. Botnets are powerful and, with a simple command, can be switched from a spambot to a password thief or DDOS attacker," Microsoft said.
Damn "Submit My Comment" button does NOT work in IE9, Toms Staff can you fix this.
I meant to say does NOT work reliably.
Yes, whoever controls iOS has that much power. Same for Android and probably others.
So far the Apple botnet seems to have only been used to push spam apps and emotions of unjustified superiority on its victims. Officials are unsure if any more nefarious plans are in store for the botnet's victims.
...now if only they could get rid of all those Nigerian princes who need my bank account to break out of the country. Man, quality control down there must suck with so many of them...
I'll correct your grammar mistakes for you in your stone throwing sentence.
Wow. (one period) How about some spelling (ing) and grammar checking? (a question) I think I'm done with Toms. (period, end of statement) T(cap)he quality has slipped to an all new low.
Use Chrome or Firefox, fix't.
I would have just given you thumbs down but they don't work. People who use IE and complain that stuff on the internet doesn't succeed on their fail browser is very 2007. Get with the times.
Sometimes don't work in any browser - from time to time I have to copy paste from chrome to ie or vise versa to post at all. But being unable to log in from a mobile device and the 'desktop version' not working is even more annoying than their piece of beep cms
The difference is, he is not a paid journalist. He also has every right to question poor grammar.
And paid journalists aren't paid proof readers. They're paid to inform you, which they do if you focus on their content, rather than how they try to communicate it to you.
i wonder why they don't have a proof reader though >_< english majors usually have a hard time finding employment, i bet they could find one cheap!
probably by shooting
So by your logic it would be acceptable to read a major broadsheet newspaper like the times or the telegraph riddled with grammatical errors because the journalist is not expected to use correct spelling only report? How about a news reader on the BBC or a journalist in the field reporting live using slang?
Give me a break.
Your analogy doesn't work. Newspapers use Copy Editors to take the content provided by journalists and put it in print or on the web.