Talk:Flashback (Trojan)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Flashback (Trojan) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contents of the Fakeflash page were merged into Flashback (Trojan). For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Discussion
editIf the virus is installed automatically, without operator intervention, when a compromised server is visited on an unpatched OS X Macintosh computer, the why on earth is it being called a "Trojan horse" in this article?!? Trojan horses, by very definition achieve installation through social engineering. Calling this infection a "trojan horse" in the body of the article is misleading and factually incorrect, regardless of whether the accepted name for this malware includes the word "Trojan", due to legacy reasons. --24.207.227.240 (talk) 17:47, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- It's how computer security companies have named it. We can't come up with our own name and definition per WP:OR, meaning that we can't do anything else but follow what's cited in existing sources. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 03:08, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
- There are apparently several versions. The first ones were Trojans, while later versions use the Java exploit. I could find a link if needed. Paedric (talk) 20:49, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
- This article is so inaccurate; I'm embarrassed and I didn't even create it. First of all, Intego discovered the Flashback Trojan (OSX/Flashback.A). Secondly, however, Dr. Web discovered the latest variant which is not a Trojan horse. The problem is the only real experts who will accurately describe the malware do so from primary sources. Using the mainstream media as a encyclopedic source for a topic that they know nothing about shows exactly what is wrong with the policies of Wikipedia. One day, when I have time, I will try and fix this mess. 173.160.211.253 (talk) 23:44, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Detection
editIt would be helpful if someone could post a link to info on how to detect it, either by examining the infected machine locally, or through a remote scan. e.g. Does it have an open port listening? 129.219.155.89 (talk) 17:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
600,000 infected computers
editHow can the Russian Antivirus company find out how many computers are infected?
It seems that only the "control server" can know the number with its unique identifiers. I think this is very suspicious. -- Michael Janich (talk) 03:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not an internet forum. The purpose of article talk pages are to suggest improvements to the article. There are better avenues for such discussion, and Wikipedia is not one of them. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 10:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)