Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

BBC Links Linux To MyDoom

simoniker posted more than 10 years ago | from the supporting-the-cause dept.

Caldera 1194

minus_273 writes "It seems the BBC has a story on their front page titled 'Linux cyber-battle turns nasty', very specifically linking Linux users to the MyDoom virus. Some lines to note: 'If anyone's anger has no measure, it is the wrath of internet zealots who believe that code should be free to all (open source). So, it seems likely that the perpetrators of the MyDoom virus and its variants are internet vandals with a specific grudge.'"

cancel ×

1194 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

'nuff said (-1)

graveyardduckx (735761) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187013)

BBC ph33rz/is pwned by SCO.

Why I'm not surprised... (5, Insightful)

nametaken (610866) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187015)

That the BBC is being criticized worldwide for making unfounded claims.

Re:Why I'm not surprised... (5, Insightful)

jangell (633044) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187039)

Who gives a shit if a Linux user wrote it? If a Windows user wrote a virus to attack Linux the news articles wouldn't be saying "Microsoft Users are Evil. Attacking innocent Linux Users".. They would be.. "Linux is Inseccure and worthless" ..

If you don't want viruses to spread, don't have users running as adminstrators as default. Don't write worthless code.

Microsoft is just asking for it, as is SCO.

Re:Why I'm not surprised... (5, Funny)

mirko (198274) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187157)

Who gives a shit if a Linux user wrote it ?

Well, if MyDoom is indeed "la creme de la creme" in terms of Windows programing, then it is obvious its author is an expert Windows developer, isn't it ?

So, it is quite flattering for the Linux community to associate any of its member to a multiplatform coding genius.

Re:Why I'm not surprised... (4, Insightful)

Goldberg's Pants (139800) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187041)

What amuses me is the opening part.

The MyDoom virus represents a new level of sophistication in attacks on company websites.

How is it anymore sophisticated than the last 20 viruses down the pipe that DoS sites?

Methinks SCO has a journo at the BBC bought and paid for...

Re:Why I'm not surprised... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187054)

BBC just sexed up this war on SCO....

Pretty hilarious... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187079)

I see unfounded and baseless claims about Microsoft on /. all the time, nobody complains or feels aggrieved about those. Regular posts based on outdated perceptions and ill thought out assumptions. Funny how the media suits people when it is publishing stories that work for them. Sadly this will get modded to Troll.

Re:Pretty hilarious... (4, Insightful)

gilroy (155262) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187164)

Blockquoth the poster:

I see unfounded and baseless claims about Microsoft on /. all the time, nobody complains or feels aggrieved about those.

slashdot is not a news organization, despite its byline. There are no crack investigative journalists working for slashdot and no one pretends that there are. The BBC is a widely respected news source accorded respect by its viewers/listeners, who will tend to accept its pronouncements based on its reputation (recently tarnished anyway) for journalistic integrity. They have a responsibility to check their facts and not spin conspiracy theories for the heck of it.

Reality of course is different.

Re:Why I'm not surprised... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187175)

Informative, my ass.

Mods in crack. Nice troll, though

Linux = Get fucked Bill Gates you stupid cunt (-1)

perthstyle (567666) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187016)

Fuck Microsoft for holding back the world. Battle!!!!

Well, isn't it? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187018)

Seems likely to me.

OT: Did /. go down earlier (-1, Offtopic)

mcbridematt (544099) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187019)

This is off topic, but can anyone confirm that /. Seriously fuckup earlier? I got 503 rejections, followed with what appears to be cached content.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (-1, Offtopic)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187024)

Ya, it's been jacked up for the past few hours for me. I keeped getting 503 errors depending on the link.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187025)

Yeah. Slashdot must run on Linux.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187028)

Yes, seriously offtopic (hence anon), but it was down.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (0, Offtopic)

Hopelessness (742112) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187034)

Yes, it was definitly offline. Were they possibly updating something? All links simply displayed the main page. That is if you got past the main index, which indeed got you a 503 error.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (-1, Offtopic)

Goonie_Goo (650666) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187036)

Yeah I got the same thing too..

Rather weird.

I had assumed it might be the silly firewall I am behind but it appears that's not the case...

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187038)

503 Service Unavailable

The service is not available. Please try again later.

500 Internal Server Error

An internal server error occurred. Please try again later.

Word. I've never seen this trash with IIS. And I thought Linux was reliable? Back to good ol' Win2003 with its 5 nines.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187062)

Linux is reliable. It's usually admins "fixing" things that is the reason these things happen.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (1)

Rick the Red (307103) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187074)

This is nothing new. Happens all the time. Usually when someone "updates" the slash [slashdot.org] code, which means we can now do the usual search for what's been broken (usually the lameness filter). Updates to slash almost never improve Slashdot.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187124)

That's why they call them updates, and not improvements. You can't improve software forever, but you can update it forever...

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187046)

I've been getting 503 rejections all this day. Something wrong with OSDN servers. Availability of SF service is also very bad lately. I'm serious.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187083)

OT, but yes, I was also getting error 503 earlier.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187084)

I can confirm that... seemed slashdot was slashdotted ;)
I know others that had the same problem, so it definately wasn't isolated.

SLASHDOT = RUNNED BY INEPT IDIOT LINUX FANBOYS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187097)

What the hell do you expect? Slashdot is the pinnacle of hypocritical zealotry, the kind of retards that turn Open Source into a religion then blame something else when the software they use fucks up (either that or they are making on-the-fly code changes on the production servers *again*). Fucking losers...

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187104)

Yeah, I got some 503's on some articles and on the main page.

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187150)

Yes /. is messed up, I think everyone is getting it..

Mydoom for /. ?

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187160)

Yep... Even to polls were screwed...

Re:OT: Did /. go down earlier (1)

krumms (613921) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187162)

Yup. In addition, once I actually got back in, attempting to view replies resulted in being redirected to the slashdot home page.

They got it wrong (5, Insightful)

Mork29 (682855) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187021)

who believe that code should be free to all

We just believe that GPL code should STAY free for all like it was when it was published under the GPL. I know such an idea could come only from a zealot... but hey....

Re:They got it wrong (4, Insightful)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187131)

"I know such an idea could come only from a zealot... but hey...."

That's not what they tuned in to. It's the comments like "I might just let this virus do its work..." that led to that conclusion. If you 'non-zealots' don't want to have the finger pointed in your direction , then I would strongly recommend treating this case with more objectivity instead of cracking anti-SCO comments.

Well, duh (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187022)

Who else would have written it?

Microsoft fans are twiddling their thumbs right now as the over-zealous Linux community shows their true colors... at worst, a bunch of kids.

Re:Well, duh (2, Insightful)

Zo0ok (209803) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187076)

Who else would have written it?

Assume your implication is correct, and it is obvious that the virus writer must have been some Linux-warrior. Then it would make sense for anyone who wants to discredit Linux to write such a virus.

Thus, SCO, M$ or someone else who dislikes Linux could have written it.

Complain (4, Insightful)

26199 (577806) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187027)

Click 'feedback' at the bottom of the page, fill in the article URL, and explain why this really isn't on.

Keep it civil, folks, and with any luck we can get an apology or at least a retraction.

Re:Complain (5, Funny)

kinnell (607819) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187078)

Keep it civil, folks

Screw that! Someone write a mydoom variant which targets the BBC. That'll teach them to bad mouth linux zealots.

Re:Complain (1)

fundflow (87625) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187102)

BBC is notorious for highly biased coverage, which gave it the title 'Bagdad Broadcas Corporation'

Re:Complain (1)

herwin (169154) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187154)

Done. The probable sources are either spammers or the infowar community. The Russian term, 'maskerovka' seems to apply.

Re:Complain (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187158)

Also, someone should let the BBC know that it's suspected that the Half-Life 2 source code was stolen by Linux programmers [slashdot.org] . This important fact has been ignored by the mainstream media.

Can't even get the details right (5, Informative)

rabbit994 (686936) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187029)

From the article:

It has attacked a company based in Utah called SCO, bringing down its website with a barrage of emails sent from countless computers into which the worm had been insinuated, unbeknownst to the users.

It was HTTP GET requests. Problem is most PHB listen to people like him but they can't even get the freaking details right on small shit like that. Yes they were probably hit bad with MyDoom email viruses but so my 6 user server. HTTP GET DDOS was targeted at them but that has been zero proof of a Linux Zealot targeting them. Let me know when you get evidence not just some speculation.

Re:Can't even get the details right (3, Funny)

jonatanw (667696) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187120)

Well, i bet most people who reads that article doesn't know the difference between http and mail.. "Oh, yeah, mail, i can do that on a website!" -- typical hotmail user

I e-mailed (4, Insightful)

SkArcher (676201) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187031)

As soon as I saw the story - Please, for the love of whichever god you happen to believe in and/or live in fear of, be polite and give them references - the guy that wrote this article is obviously living stateside and Darl must have corrupted him.

Mainstream media... (4, Insightful)

Max Romantschuk (132276) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187032)

There's not much one can do about stuff like this. The media wants a story, they'll be happy to distort reality in order to get one.

The most important thing is to let people know we don't approve of the actions taken by creators of these viree. Not by shouting about it, but telling people, calmly, whenever given the chance. Tell your neighbour's dog walker if he/she will listen.

Fortunately popular belief does not rule (most) legal systems.

media whoring of mass destruction (1)

segment (695309) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187070)

How dare you claim the media would do such a thing as sway logic via news. [politrix.org]

Re:Mainstream media... (4, Insightful)

rjelks (635588) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187085)

After all of the SCO FUD, I'm not suprised so many people were taking enjoyment out of SCO's misfortune. Unfortunatly, people are looking for someone to blame and this does make for a good story. I've seen slashdot members' comments quoted on stories about this virus, so people are looking here for a response. I know it's been talked about before, but here [perens.com] is Bruce Perens letter to the OSS community again. Everyone's certainly entitled to their opinions, but he makes a good point.

Re:Mainstream media... (1)

SimplyCosmic (15296) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187142)

The thing that somewhat confuses me is why linking the virus to Linux would be worth it, being that the majority of Joe Public really has no clue that such a thing as alternative operating systems exist.

When a good number of the public believe that MS Windows runs on everything, including Macs, isn't merely blaming the virus on the usual "nefarious hackers" sufficient?

Silly BBC... (4, Funny)

PatrickThomson (712694) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187033)

Don't they know what happens when you incur the wrath of linux users?

Silly BBC, your smoking crack again... (5, Funny)

azulza (651826) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187037)

If the virus were written by Linux coders it woulndn't have failed so badly when it triggered. The poorly written code has to have been written by someone with intimite knowledge of poor coding skills and Microsoft vulnerabilities... Humm... Do I smell a disgruntled MS employee?

Re:Silly BBC, your smoking crack again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187051)

No, but I smell a retarded Linux zealot who is oblivious to a barrage of evidence pointing to the Linux community.

Re:Silly BBC, your smoking crack again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187105)

10-to-1 that azulza here has never even coded hello world in microsoft basic.

Anyway, go check out freshmeat.net and get back to us about the great coding skillz in the Linux world.

Logic, but not of a good quality. (4, Insightful)

dbirchall (191839) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187048)

Generally when something bad happens, you do try to figure out who might have made it happen. There are "usual suspects" for a lot of things. And "people who dislike or are mad at the victim of this particular thing" tends to be part of that set...

However, there's also the matter of a modus operandi. While the Linux community certainly doesn't like SCO or Microsoft, its members aren't particularly known for writing virus code. In fact, writing Windows virus code would probably require greater... intimacy with Windows than most users of other operating systems would ever want to have.

My guess is that it's either a rogue coder or a coder in the employ of somebody (spammers are "the usual suspects" for employing virus writers lately, but why attack Microsoft and SCO, then?) who's probably using, and used to coding for, Windows. That's far more logical.

Re:Logic, but not of a good quality. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187077)

OTOH, a certain group of Linux users have a long history of using DDOS attacks against WWW sites. You might not like it, but it's a fact.

New to you (5, Funny)

MachDelta (704883) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187049)

It represents a new degree of viciousness in internet warfare: a wickedly ingenious programme persuades thousands of computers to bombard a single website on a particular date.
Say what? Hasn't /. been doing this for years already?

this is not surprising (4, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187050)

there are two elements of understanding any issue in the news

there is an informed, fair and balanced view

then there is the 15 second layman appraisal from viewing bits of media coverage

clearly, mydoom is an attack by linux zealots in the mind of the average layman

clearly, the truth is linux advocates are horrified at what this script kiddie has done

however, the court of public opinion is 99% of the population and the court of computer scientists is 1% of the population

if we have learned anything about wmd and iraq, the court of public opion matters alot, while the microscopic court of the informed matters very little

so what is mydoom all about? angry linux zealots

scream about how it is not so on slashdot, the turth is mydoom is the work of script kiddies, we all know that, but you are preaching to the choir

in the court of public opinion what mydoom is is very clear, and the informed on the issue can do very little about it

Biggest problem with the net... (4, Insightful)

segment (695309) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187053)

You know I wrote something along these lines a while back. (Breaking Point [politrix.org] ) Not this scenario exactly, but how easy it would be to digitally frame someone online. It's a shame things are getting out of hand. Maybe I should take some time write the document correctly (formatting, spelling) and make a request for comments from others in the community and make some little "READ ME" for people who don't understand tech too much. I know BBC would have probably taken a different look if they knew enough about computing to understand how easy it is to pass off something as someone else on the net.

Research...? (1)

Polkyb (732262) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187056)

It represents a new degree of viciousness in internet warfare: a wickedly ingenious programme persuades thousands of computers to bombard a single website on a particular date."

They make it sound like the first... Methinks a little more research, on their parts, may be in order.

Re:Research...? (0, Offtopic)

rjelks (635588) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187148)

That reminds me of the "Google Traffic Takes Down Web Site" article a little while ago. I wonder if the BBC [bbc.co.uk] reporter read that article. It would be ironic if the BBC [bbc.co.uk] was slashdoted after writing such a negotive story. I think if anyone has a problem with the BBC [bbc.co.uk] article they should contact the BBC [bbc.co.uk] and let their feelings be known.

Fact-gathering is passe (5, Funny)

Grrr (16449) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187057)

Here's what immediately follows that last quote...

So, it seems likely that the perpetrators of the MyDoom virus and its variants are internet vandals with a specific grudge. SCO is the big, bad company that violates one of their sacred principles, as they would see it.

There's no proof, of course, but it must be one of the theories at the top of any investigator's list.


And this is from a organization which allegedly deals in "news" ?

<grrr>

Reporter is a moron (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187064)

programme?????

It's program you dork!

Re:Reporter is a moron (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187165)

Errrr...
"No"

Just in... (5, Funny)

efextra (673412) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187065)

A new version of MyDoom has been found that is targetting bbc.co.uk

The whole truth? (1, Interesting)

dontbgay (682790) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187067)

Two years ago, SCO claimed that it owned more than 800,000 lines of the system which had always been available for free and to anyone since its invention in 1991.

Why don't Steven Evans tell the whole story about SCO's claims being unsubstantiated? Maybe the guy didn't care or was serving his own agenda's? Either way, this is objective reporting at it's finest.

Almost crosses the Godwin's Law line (1)

tempest303 (259600) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187068)

Wow, Stephen, while you're at it, why don't you call Linux users terrorists or Nazis, too? What about all the other worms that have bowled over Windows machines for years. I suppose those were all written by those eeeeeevil Lunix h4x0rs, too, right?

Re:Almost crosses the Godwin's Law line (2, Interesting)

vollmerk (740066) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187147)

On a more serious note I have to agree with tempest.. It's unfortunate that someone decided to create this virus, and cause anyone in IT (who supports windows boxes) to have to deal with it. At the same time they make the linux community look bad to people who take what they read in the news at face value. Which I'm sad to sad is most likely a large percentage of people...

You could almost argue that it was created by a Anti-Linux user as a way of discrediting the linux community... :(

WELL EXCUSE ME PRINCESS (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187071)

well excuuuuuuuse me princess [wellexcusemeprincess.com]

BBC, what have you done? (2, Interesting)

atomico (162710) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187072)

The BBC has always been a reference in public broadcasting. The only one that dared challenge its own government (Irak invasion), the one that produces the best series and documentaries, the envy of every other European country.

Let's hope this is not the beginning of a downwards slope towards the most atrocious yellow press... this is comparable to accusing all Muslim people of Bin Laden's crimes. Oh quality journalism, where are you when we need you most!

What do you expect? (2, Redundant)

mrdaveb (239909) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187073)

The BBC employ hacks to write dumbed down pseudo-news just the same as all the other news providers do. It's just a shame they sometimes elevate this speculation and filler material to the front page of their website along with the real news.

How the mighty have fallen (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187075)

How can you believe anything the BBC puts out? They fabricate stories at will, put their spin on them, and release them as God's Own Truth. They finally got called on it by the recent report that established they were lying.

Jeez, you might as well read the New York Times or Weekly World News for this kind of drek.

Hutton enquiry ? (1)

tdhdeep (674286) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187080)

Let us all request Lord Hutton to conduct an enquiry and as usual blast BBC :)

Yes guys we can make Stephen Evans (BBC North America Business Correspondent) to resign !!!

A Good Sign? (5, Interesting)

RandomLinguist (712026) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187086)

I would argue that this violent reactionism is one sign that OSS is on the verge of mainstream acceptance. Throughout history, as new ideas have supplanted older, closely held ones, the group that holds fast to those practices and principles becomes more and more marginalized and reacts by lashing out viciously. Could this be the case here? I think it is. Hopefully these opposing voices will continue to get smaller and more violent, alienating even more people from their cause. Besides, who can argue with free publicity?

Also, I, being a 'run-of-the-mill geek', am quite flattered that I now have the ability to gleefully (and apparently psychotically) 'wreak damage' on people's computers. Guess I picked that up and didn't even realize...
[BBC: "Deep in the darkness of the psyche, vandals and arsonists no doubt have their reasons - and so, presumably, do the run-of-the-mill geeks who wreak damage on the unsuspecting computer user."]

Joe-Job (1)

piquadratCH (749309) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187087)

Could someone explain to this genious what a Joe-Job is?

Wrath of the geeks ! (1)

Trimbo2 (661670) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187089)

Great heading!

You guys are all hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187090)

Why is that when the BBC spouts off its anti-Bush garbage, they are the "one true, reliable, unbaised world news source," but when anti-Linux news comes out, it's "a horribly incorrect tabloid?"

Maybe the linux community needs an inquiry? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187092)

Lord Hutton is not so busy these days. He'll get us off the hook.

job (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187093)

American people got jobs all century TIME for PAKI people get job!!! Why american get 42" TV why Paki not get it?? Why Paki need work carwash and american not??? Why Paki can't sit couch to dial order Pizzahut and american can?? Why Paki can't marry wife and sex her all night and american can??? Why american have money and Paki no money?? I want wife, soft coach, 42" tv, pizzaline, be able eat Burger king, fuck with wife on coach!! why not can I do it?? Thank Microsoft it is now posible!!!! Thank you!!! I know windows they pay me.

Read the article in full (5, Informative)

p_millipede (714918) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187099)

Just after the quote given, the article goes on with:
There's no proof, of course, but it must be one of the theories at the top of any investigator's list.

So, the BBC aren't actually saying that Linux users are behind it. They're saying that it is a theory that many people give weight to!

The entire article is troll/flamebait! (1)

xorbe (249648) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187103)

As it doesn't *ever* mention the backdoors that it leaves open for post-installment of key-sniffers, spam-relays, etc etc.

More and more stereotyping (2, Insightful)

mind21_98 (18647) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187106)

Why can't we just all get along? I'm serious. The actions of the MyDoom creators are not indicitive of the actions or opinions of the rest of the community. To say otherwise would be the same as being what you're against. I would have expected better from the BBC, but whatever.

BBC Article is Uninformed (3, Interesting)

nsuttitinagul (318095) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187109)

"For good measure, SCO is seeking at least a billion dollars from IBM....

SCO is the big, bad company that violates one of their sacred principles, as they would see it."

I don't think this article sees very much of the issue. Why didn't they do a more serious analysis of SCO and the fact that many top executives are dumping stock? Why didn't they look at it from a legal standpoint focusing on the etymology of the code supposedly in question? Why didn't they point out keenly that SCO has not produced any real evidence?

Regardless of what side you're on, you have to look at these things. These facts at least are concrete, vs. the complete lack of evidence specifically implicating a linux user as the author of MyDoom. For all we know, it could be SCO spreading FUD over linux and painting themselves as the victim when they in fact are responsible. We don't know now, do we?

Chilling implications... (1, Interesting)

FrankGibson (722021) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187110)

Stories such as these are incredibly worrying to me as a journalist and as a citizen who partakes in news constantly. If people can't properly research something that is already incredibly well documented and reasonably simple, I'm wondering how utterly smegged (to use a BBC coined term) their coverage of the various complex political situations occuring worldwide.

/.'ing the article isn't going to help. :) (1)

ircShot_guN (737033) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187111)

It will just incriminate us further, it is [i]obvious[/i] that we created the virus just so the BBC could host a story about it, blaming us, [i]just[/i] so we could /. them.

ok then (2, Insightful)

n.o.d.y.n.e (747945) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187112)

So we all believe the MyDoom virus attacking SCO was a coincidence? Yeah, right. Face the facts kids, it had disgruntled Linux geek written all over it.

Blackmail (2, Interesting)

MikeD83 (529104) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187114)

Directly from the article:

The attack also raises the possibility of internet blackmail, with companies threatened by individuals or even an individual who might be anywhere.This attack, though, is not blackmail. It is about malice not money.

Perhaps the MyDoom virus was written to blackmail the Linux community? Without knowing the author how could you establish if it is indeed malice by an over zealous Linux user?
This article wreaks of sensationalism from a writer who sounds like he's on SCO's payroll. Shame on the BBC.

Crock (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187115)

Wait, they are painting the vandal as a linux user. Now, what happened to the articlt that says,
1) "Just doing my job, nothing personal, Andy" or something to thoes words.
2) Possible back door / key logger.

It is about money. Now painting linux user/virus writer/zealot. Come on now. You might as well as said he drives a Ford or a GM car and share some of the blame. I bet this person has a PC now lets all blame Intel and AMD.

Share the blame.

What a crock

BBC Story Feedback URL (4, Informative)

tinla (120858) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187116)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/help/3281777.stm [bbc.co.uk]

The bbc accepts feedback on stories. It is worth letting them know that there is no evidence to suggest the involvement of members of the linux community, they may be involved or they may be a handy group to frame. If this wasn't 'scary computers viruses' the media would be be more sceptical of the obvious conclusion.

use the feedback link !!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187117)

complaint about the baseless article, click the feedback link, and have the url handy !

Also.. (1)

Renraku (518261) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187118)

So would it make the virus writer any less guilty if he wrote the virus using Windows?

Oh wait, this isn't about the virus or the virus writer. This is an excuse to say, "We don't like your operating system, therefore, everyone that uses it is probably a criminal."

Oh come off it... (1, Informative)

TehHustler (709893) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187122)

To suggest that it DOESN'T have anything to do with Linux users is just as bad. I mean, it seems the most logical choice. Who else would have such hatred for SCO and Microsoft that they'd want to attack them? Surely not your everyday Windows users, thats for sure. Most of THEM have never even heard of SCO.


I'm going to get flamed for this for sure, but if you think this had nothing to do with Linux users, you're an idiot.


Just my opinion, of course...

Re:Oh come off it... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187136)

gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay you're right of course gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay

Re:Oh come off it... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187168)

You're an idiot too.

In an independent study (5, Funny)

nil5 (538942) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187126)

I have linked MyDoom to SCO and Microsoft as well.

I have also linked Saddam Hussein to Iraq and the BBC to Great Britain.

I am very good at linking.

Sunday, front page: (1)

Sir Pallas (696783) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187129)

If you use Linux, the terrorists have already won.

I almost pity him (1)

Captain Beefheart (628365) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187139)

He's gonna get flamed to the point of carbonization. Good lord, how could someone be so dense? Supporting evidence? Nope. Just reprehensibly lazy speculation. What some people will do for traffic. The man stains his entire publication with such drivel. I don't even use Linux much, and I am disgusted.

Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187140)


This goes just like the old saying, just vice versa: Put Your Mouth Where Your Money Is.

I mean really... (1)

Mr. Arbusto (300950) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187144)

Is this really unexpected? Someone made a virus and threw out some bait and the BBC bit. They won't be the last, I'd expect to see something like this in the New York Times.

This reminds me of regular reporters to medical news. They might be the best reporters in the world, but it is still miss informed and sometimes just plain wrong. It isn't necessarily their fault, they just don't know what they are covering and are forced to regurgitate what info they hear first, and loudest.

PS... If an GNU/OSS lackey did this may they burn in SCO for the annoyance they've caused, you would have been better picking on Microsoft

And where is the source? (3, Funny)

Advocadus Diaboli (323784) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187152)

Since there is no source code published under the GPL yet I don't believe that Mydoom was created by Linux programmers. It looks more like a closed source work.

Let us not forget our Truth Tables (3, Insightful)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187155)

Not a troll, but try to remember the inverse of the statement "All Linux Users are responsible for the MyDoom virus" is not "No Linux User is responsible for the MyDoom virus". The validity of the statement "The MyDoom virus author is a Linux User" is not verified -- but drawing any sort of Universal conclusion (affirmatively or negatively) is not valid reasoning.

Report (1)

simgod (563459) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187166)

I am starting to think that Lord Hutton was objective after all.

send a feedback (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187171)

use the feedback form [bbc.co.uk] to tell the bbc in a polite way that they are wrong.

the odd thing is all the mass media is saying this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8187172)

what is it about the open source community that the mass media is so intimidated about? Are they really so utterly mis-informed about us?bbb

News Article? or Editorial? (3, Interesting)

_Hellfire_ (170113) | more than 10 years ago | (#8187174)

I'm a little confused. The BBC website has this in the news section. Now I've always understood news to be the (hopefully) unbiased reporting of facts. The "article" seems little more than the rambling musings of someone who clearly doesn't understand the situation at all - which ordinarily would put it under "editorials".

This sort of baseless conjecture should always be clearly marked as such. To pass this off as "news" smacks of the kind of wild sensationalism the BBC is world famous for.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?