Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Security United States

US Leads the World In Malware Creation 126

Posted by kdawson from the scratch-a-criminal dept.
PetManimal writes "Symantec says that China, Russia, and the other developing countries usually blamed for the increasing amount of malware are not the biggest culprits. The security software company released a report (PDF) claiming that the US leads the world in a number of malware categories, ranging from the 'amount of malicious activity originating from their networks' to 'underground economy servers.' Preston Gralla says the US lead should come as no surprise, considering the capitalist way of life and the high level of technical knowledge. He also suggests that the some of the 'criminals' may actually be Internet entrepreneurs who crossed over to the dark side: 'It's an inevitable result of a thriving free market and tech expertise. An underground economy often mirrors the legal, above-ground one. Scratch a criminal, and sometimes you find a misguided entrepreneur, looking to get rich a little too quick.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Leads the World In Malware Creation More

US Leads the World In Malware Creation

Comments Filter:
  • Idle hands are the devil's plaything. I would think the America's constant need to be entertained also factors into the amount of malware.
  • During the depths of the IT recession, there were rumbles of out-of-work programmers talking about joining the "dark side" out of frustration. Perhaps many did.
             
    • ... and operating systems, and encryption, and VoIP, and browsers, and tax preparation, and CRM, and video games, and instant message clients, and illustration/graphic design, and pretty much any other string which you can append "software" to. That we lead in malware is not a heck of a lot of suprise. We also probably are neck and neck with Japan for producing cars used by bank robbers in getaways.

  • Not just the US (Score:4, Informative)

    by blackicye ( 760472 ) on Monday March 19, 2007 @11:08PM (#18410385)
    There are a number of fairly organized malware purveyors from Canada as well, I think what separates the malware originating from North America, and the malware coming from the East is the purpose of the malware.

    In NA, its mainly spyware or extortionware.
    From the East a majority of them are keyloggers, dialers.

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I think what separates the malware originating from North America, and the malware coming from the East is the purpose of the malware.

      You're talking out of your ass.
      • "You're talking out of your ass."

        Sure I'll bite, since AC trolls now get modded insightful.

        Why don't you post your experiences to the contrary while logged in instead of AC?
        Oh, you've got nothing to say?

        I repair PCs for a living, and this is from my firsthand experiences of spyware ridden boxes, if you believe or have observed otherwise, do share.

  • Look who's calling the kettle black. (Score:5, Funny)

    by d2_m_viant ( 811261 ) on Monday March 19, 2007 @11:10PM (#18410395)
    Takes one to know one. Symantec's software has all the qualities you'd ever want in a well crafted piece of malware.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Broken scope ( 973885 )
      Does that make the pot wrong?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by craagz ( 965952 )
      Maybe Symantec employs people to create malware for which it releases anti-dotes.

      These same employees were transferred and employed to creating and upgrading Symantec products. Thus leading to all products appearing like malware.

  • misguided? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jaymzru ( 1005177 ) on Monday March 19, 2007 @11:13PM (#18410405)
    Scratch a criminal, and sometimes you find a misguided entrepreneur, looking to get rich a little too quick.
    Is malware even illegal? How is malware different from say, an automatic update or some other less than desirable software? Just because something is annoying doesn't necessarily mean it's illegal and that the author is a criminal.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Seumas ( 6865 )
      Uh. I believe the difference would be the mal part. Update - as annoying as it is - is not malicious.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by caller9 ( 764851 )
      It becomes criminal when it phones home with all of your pertinent keystrokes name, email, credit card + secret number, account #s, social, DOB, passwords, etc which are then sold on the black market. Where have you been?

      I assume you're thinking adware which is in rare cases only annoying, most cases privacy invading, and many cases illegal anyway.
      • Ah, I was thinking of adware. Not meaning to be a fanboy, but I've run linux and os x since windows 95 and I don't think I've ever had malware on one of my machines - although I suppose I wouldn't know, since I don't really look for it either.
        • Sometime when you're looking for an evening's entertainment (and not in the company of others, unless they also find this sort of thing terribly interesting), fire up a VMWare VM and load it up with Windows XP SP1, then fire up Internet Explorer and browse around. For fastest results, be sure to hit up some of the seedier side of the internet -- a quick Google for "serial numbers" will get you malware-ridden sites within the first few results. Then, just hit yourself on the head or otherwise simulate a stupid/ignorant user, and click "OK" to anything the computer prompts at you for a few minutes.

          In short order, you will probably have so much adware, malware, Trojans, and keyloggers on the VM, it's nearly impossible to ever clean it out (AFAIK you really can't with any reliability say that a machine once rooted is 'clean' until you zero the drive and reinstall from media). Monitoring the network connections and traffic that the VM makes is also pretty interesting. (Its easiest if you set up the VM's virtual interface with a different IP than the host machine's physical interface.)

          If you want to go for a second round, Google "adware removal" and download or run the first half-dozen or so tools that you see; chances are at least some of them will make the problem worse.

          The benefit of doing this in a VM is you can trivially roll the system back to an uncorrupted state, and just banish the thing altogether when you're done entertaining yourself. It really caused me to appreciate two things: one, reminding me why I don't use that OS at home, and two, the absolutely ridiculous amount of effort that must be spent (patching, updating, firewalling, antivirusing, user training) to keep the billions of Windows machines that people depend on from succumbing to the same fate in a matter of minutes.

          Anyone who doesn't use Windows on a regular basis should do that every year or so, if only for the "there, but for the grace of God..." value.
          • I worked with a guy, when we were working on malware removal techniques, who did exactly this. Our google search was either 'warez' or 'crackz', I can't recall. He even played the stupid user - "Yeah, I'm sure I can install this activeX stuff, whatever that means...The site told me to hit OK" - and the box was LEVELED beyond repair in under 5 minutes and 10 sites. We had to pull the virtual ethernet card on it. It got to the point that the box almost got beligerent as we tried to pull the malware out...
          • Your simulation is quite unrealistic, because it assumes that a dumb user browses crackz & warez sites: this is IMHO quite unlikely. Gamers, power users etc would do it but not your typical dumb user. The problem anyway is not that if you click OK your box gets rooted - the situation is much worse, there are many exploits lying around on warez and pr0n sites and they will root your box silently and without user interaction. This happens because MSIE is a suboptimal browsing platform when it comes to sec

            • Your simulation is quite unrealistic, because it assumes that a dumb user browses crackz & warez sites: this is IMHO quite unlikely. Gamers, power users etc would do it but not your typical dumb user.

              The use of crackz and warez sites is just to accelerate the process. Unless you confine your browsing to only the most trustworthy sites on the net, you'll eventually get infected.

            • I think you could replace "warez" with any number of NSFW porn terms and turn up the same things, and idiot users do troll for porn. And I'd argue that a lot of idiots who don't know what they're doing, end up at cracks/warez sites too ("hey, my friend said I can get expensive games for free..."); you're assuming a lot of intelligence on the part of people who are Googling for and clicking on the top results for obvious terms like "serial number crack" and the like.

              But anyway, I really only included that st

          • I think that you have hit upon it. A computer behind a NAT firewall can stay uninfected (even without AV software) if a user restricts her/his browsing to the more mainstream segments of the web. From my experience, computers with spyware/malware/trojans/viruses mostly have contracted the problem from at least one of the following ways:

            • Downloading software or songs with Limewire, Kazaa or other P2P
            • Visitng pr0n or warez sites
            • opening unsolicited emails (especially attachments)
            • Downloading and
            • Very interesting. I wasn't aware of that, and I'm now glad that I wasn't using VMWare in the NATed configuration (although, IIRC, that is the default!).

              I prefer to let the VM's virtual network interface talk to the LAN and get its own DHCP lease and IP address, just to make it easier to determine what traffic is coming from the host and what's from the guest, if I want to analyze traffic at the router or somewhere else downstream. I'm not sure what VMWare's lingo is for this type of setup, but it's pretty t

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by sqlrob ( 173498 )
                If you're really wanting to play with malware, you can't trust virtualization. You don't know that that is the only problem. For example, what if there's a buffer overflow in the clipboard that propagates out to the host? Not a problem on a local machine, but in a virtual going to the host, it can be a big problem.

                Also, moot for this, but some malware behaves differently under VMWare. Not out of bugs, but to help prevent analysis.

          • Anyone who doesn't use Windows on a regular basis should do that every year or so, if only for the "there, but for the grace of God..." value.

            I just listen to the Security Now podcast. Did you know about the virus-like behavior that simply arose because of a bug in Windows? It's called "Free Public WiFi" [wordpress.com]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dbIII ( 701233 )
      In the cases of things I've had to remove it really can be classed as sabotage. Over a hundred machines with various breeds of *nix and it's the XP machine of the guy that like to download things to rip DVDs and mp3s that needs more attention.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Tim C ( 15259 )
      Well, here in the UK it almost certainly falls foul of the Computer Misuse Act, which explicitly outlaws using computer resources without permission. You can hardly compare malware to automatic updates either (even if you were thinking of adware), as for the vast majority of computer users auto-updates are a very, very good thing, as it's the only hope they have of keeping their machine patched. In my experience, a lot of people still see computers as an appliance; you don't patch your washing machine, or y
      • You wouldn't happen to know which law it falls under in the United States would you? My point about automatic updates was that there must be a definition somewhere saying "this is illegal, however software like this is not illegal." He's calling people criminals, so wouldn't that imply that there is a law criminalizing these people? I just want to know what it is.

  • Engineers vs Programms (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19, 2007 @11:19PM (#18410465)
    Agreed , not all 'malware' is out to get you, there is a fine line though between
    adware and 'malware' at times.

    a good software engineer, that is a 'real engineer' would refuse to create such a product, as they are sworn to protect the public interest at all costs.

    A programmer mind you, unless they are ethical, goes where the money is.

    Lets call the industry what it is, and the workers what they are. Engineers != programmers.

    Engineers can be held accountable, in many ways. Programmers on the other hand, can always hide behind the shield of the corporation.

    • Re:Engineers vs Programms (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @02:17AM (#18411383)
      Ah yes, the 'Engineers are always moral' argument. Please remind me, what programmers were assigned to the Manhatten Project, the Cruise Missile project, and who designed Napalm?

      Oh yeah... that's right, they were mostly Engineers. Spare us the high-and-mighty talk. Just becuase there's an old Freemason-like order with fancy rings involved doesn't mean engineers are some kind of uber-moral fraternity.

      No offense to the good-hearted engineers out there reading this.. I just don't like the uppity attitude of some 'engineers' who think that computing science, along with every other realm of human endeavour other than those blessed by the local Engineering faculty, are something akin to making cute little blocks with playdough.

      Parent: get off your high horse. Lots of people, no matter their vocation, have to pay the bills, and some are just attracted to the darker side, no matter their training.

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      a good software engineer, that is a 'real engineer' would refuse to create such a product, as they are sworn to protect the public interest at all costs.

      You truly are out of your fucking skull. The idea that an engineer has to take any such oath is suppurating bullshit of the highest water.

      Like some engineer's going to take a bullet for me (your words, "at all costs", not mine).

      Resume playing with yourself.

      • a 'real engineer' would refuse to create such a product
        The idea that an engineer has to take any such oath is suppurating bullshit of the highest water.
        It could be different in other countries. Maybe the GP is a true Scotsman, [wikipedia.org] or something similar.
      • ...and some are just attracted to the darker side,

        More like some are attracted to money.

        Any one else remember a similar story a while ago regarding most spam kings coming from the US too? (http://www.spamhaus.org/rokso/)

        I think I see a pattern, I wonder if it has anything to do with the US being the birthplace of unrestrained capitalism?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by erbmjw ( 903229 )

      It is not your title ie engineer or programmer that makes you ethical - it is your beliefs and integrity!

      Good engineer != ethical engineer unless you specifically define good to equal ethical in which case you have committed your statement to a state of circular definitions, and then your argument is effectively useless

      The same would hold true for your 'real engineer' argument.

      As for the line

      Engineers can be held accountable, in many ways. Programmers on the other hand, can always hide behind the shie

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by nomadic ( 141991 ) *
        The title "engineer" or "programmer" would have no bearing legally.

        Actually licensed engineers have additional standards they must meet, things that non-licensed engineers or programmers don't have to.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by erbmjw ( 903229 )

          Yes but as you have admitted it's the "licensed engineer" not the "engineer" that requires an additional standard.

          So my original statement stands the title "engineer" or "programmer" would have no legal bearing.

          If you wish to contend that there is special circumstances for licensed engineers then you are modifying your original claim significantly from all good software engineers to only licensed engineers.

          And currently there are not very many states or countries that require {or even have} software

  • Yeah, software! (Score:3, Funny)

    by NotQuiteReal ( 608241 ) on Monday March 19, 2007 @11:46PM (#18410667) Journal
    But don't forget high speed pizza delivery too!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Fred_A ( 10934 )

      But don't forget high speed pizza delivery too!
      Sooo... you're saying it's safer to order pizza from Russia ?

      (confused)

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday March 19, 2007 @11:48PM (#18410681)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Heh. While I find your comment amusing I must point out it's not the /.er's fault that China and Russia are considered developing countries. Blame human geographers for that. Russia and China are considered Developing by those groups. Personally I think it's just silly, who are we (people in general, not the US) to determine what style of life is better than another, but hey, that's how it is.
      • They might say better to be developing than going backwards...

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by elrous0 ( 869638 ) *

        Personally I think it's just silly, who are we (people in general, not the US) to determine what style of life is better than another

        While I realize that there are philosophical differences over cultural values and all that, I think it's foolish to say we can't make judgments on what constitutes a "better" life.

        I think, for example, that it's pretty fair to say that a life of hard labor in a concentration camp would suck ass compared to the life of just about anyone outside of said concentration camp.

      • Depends on how you look at it I suppose... The US is obviously still developing too. It's like a 50 yr old calling a 20 yr old a kid, then being told by an 80 yr old that he's still just wet behind the ears himself.

    • I suspect that both the Chinese and the Russian people would be *ahem* amused at having their respective countries referred to as "developing countries"
      Why should we be amused at truth? Economically-wise, both are developing countries. I know some of my fellow countrymen think that Russia inherited the "superpower" title from the Soviet Union and managed to keep it, but it is obviously a delusion.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hyfe ( 641811 )

      I suspect that both the Chinese and the Russian people would be *ahem* amused at having their respective countries referred to as "developing countries".
      That doesn't change the fact that they are though. Both countries are changing quite fast, both economically and culturally trying to find their new place in the world. What they morph into remain to be seen though.
    • Visit anywhere in China that isn't Beijing, Shanghai, or Hong Kong and tell me it's not a "developing" country. I have no experience with Russia, on the other hand.

  • Numbers Game..... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Rank_Tyro ( 721935 )
    I would guess that those numbers correspond to the number of users combined with the number of users who have no idea what computer security means.

    How many people buy a computer without knowing how to use one safely? How many of those people buy a computer and run around on the internet as administrator?

    Anytime you have a large number of users who do not understand or care to secure their computers, you will have higher numbers of those users who have been owned.

  • Windows? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Bob54321 ( 911744 ) on Monday March 19, 2007 @11:53PM (#18410715)
    We all know that Microsoft makes the most common malware known to computing. There was never really any competition to stop the USA getting the title.
    • WHY, why, why did you have to go and say it first?!?!?

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Fred_A ( 10934 )
        I was amazed it took so long for that to pop up. I thought I was on the wrong site for a moment there.

        For the sake of completeness :
        - If we all ran Multics there wouldn't be any malware
        - Don't run punched cards you get in the mail
        - Remember to reinstall from a clean set of tapes every week

        Did I forget anything ?
  • And malware will go away for good!

    Fat chance of that happening at all, huh? :(
    • So you're saying that if there is no monetary value in doing something, it will not be done? This is wrong no matter what hat you wear. On the white hat side of programming, we've got all of Open Source. On the black hat side, we've got people who release viruses for fun, rather than profit. Money is only one motivation for people, and it's generally not the strongest one for most people.

  • Excellent! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Eli Gottlieb ( 917758 ) <eligottliebNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @12:33AM (#18410953) Homepage Journal
    At least we still lead the world in something! Take that, Indian outsourcing companies.
  • symantec has always come with the qualities that serves the one-piece well implemented malware...are we talkin that malware is such a illegal? i wonder how it works for that purpose?

  • Critical Problem? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by it074771 ( 1063998 )
    Where does it become a critical problem. Well, if you get a system that is infected, you may start having problems with not only your system, but with your enterprise network. In many cases, as you might expect. The end result is that the software tries to spread itself to other and begins to use all of the bandwidth you have on your enterprise for that purpose. If you have unprotected 'everyone' shares, the software can even propagate itself to others on your network, much like a virus or Trojan and then

    • For a day to day assessment for the USA's position with regard to DoS attacks, botnets, phishing, and scanning, check out this page [arbor.net] and look at the bottom chart. You can see the number one ranked country, ASN, and host for each category.

  • WTF? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Lord Kano ( 13027 )
    "Scratch a criminal, and sometimes you find a misguided entrepreneur, looking to get rich a little too quick.'"

    You could say the same thing about crack dealers or contract killers, am I supposed to be sympathetic to them too?

    I'm not bothered by the legal aspects as much as the ethical ones. If someone is hurting someone else, they're doing something wrong. End of story.

    LK
    • So ..., just to make clear. You are a pacifist yes? Because the army and the police each hurt other people all the time.

      Not saying I disagree with you, but unless you are a pacifist, you can't really make a statement like that.

      Also, what about in self defence?

      I'm sure you could make an argument about the lesser wrongness, but I won't buy it.
      • So ..., just to make clear. You are a pacifist yes? Because the army and the police each hurt other people all the time.

        I'm more of an isolationist.

        Also, what about in self defence?

        I'm sure you could make an argument about the lesser wrongness, but I won't buy it.

        You don't have to buy it. I'm not trying to convince you.
        If inaction will cause more misery and death than action, the only right thing to do is to take action.

        If someone were trying to rape your wife or mother, she or you would be perfectly justif
  • We're #1! We're #1! The US is #1! WOOOO!

  • ...because at least I know we can produce malicious computer programs!

    And there ain't no doubt I love this land. God bless the USAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!</lee-greenwood>

  • And the difference is what, again? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by sethstorm ( 512897 ) * on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @02:43AM (#18411465) Homepage
    He also suggests that the some of the 'criminals' may actually be Internet entrepreneurs who crossed over to the dark side
    And they're different from the kind that run companies to the ground, create loopholes to avoid domestic workers, and fake their deaths to void convictions? Somehow the differences aren't stacking up.

    It's an inevitable result of a thriving free market and tech expertise.
    Apparently the Midwest hasn't gotten the memo on that one, since the 2001 recession is still going, continued by 2003's wave of job theft. There are some things that Ivy League economists will never understand. Thriving and "free market" somehow just aren't mixing in places that get the idea of not treating businesses like $DEITY.

    An underground economy often mirrors the legal, above-ground one. Scratch a criminal, and sometimes you find a misguided entrepreneur, looking to get rich a little too quick.'
    Wasnt that covered in Enron, Worldcom, HP (Hurd and Fiorina), and about any organization that uses loopholes to offshore work? That seems to point to a "misguided entrepreneur" as being one that has some morals left in them, not someone who's gone criminal.

  • He also suggests that the some of the 'criminals' may actually be Internet entrepreneurs who crossed over to the dark side...

    This is my apprentice, Darth Malware. He will find your lost revenue.
  • Scratch a criminal, and sometimes you find a misguided entrepreneur, looking to get rich a little too quick.



    Scratch an entrepreneur who is willing to ignore good business practices and ethics to get rich quickly, and you'll most likely find a criminal.

  • Windows should probably have been excluded, although doing so might drop the US far down the list.

  • Spot on (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jandersen ( 462034 ) on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @05:30AM (#18412053)


    I would say quite often in fact, but that's just my opinion. I think there is something in what serves as the basic moral code in American-style business, that makes it difficult to know where the line goes. Now don't take this as an attack on Americans or even America in general, but the kind of business ethics that is tought to American MBAs etc, is scarily devoid of what normal people would consider good moral.

    I once read about a class situation at one university - I don't recall the exact circumstances, but perhaps somebody else recognises it. The professor asked the class 'You are in charge of marketing a new medicine, and you receive reports that this medicine may be dangerous. What is the right thing to do?' Most would say things like 'We have to hold back and find out whether this product is actually dangerous and perhaps stop selling it' - but the 'right' answer, according to the professor was 'You keep on selling as much as possible until the company is forced to stop. Your only concern should be the shareholders' profit'

    This story, I think, tells just how twisted things can be. When young people are told that they have to commit moral and ethical suicide like this, how should they be able to see the fine line between being a creative entrpreneur and an outright criminal? If the size of the profit is what determines how 'right' or 'good' your actions are, then surely crime is perfectly justfied law abiding citizens are simply idiots, little better than cattle?

    • I think there is something in what serves as the basic moral code in American-style business, that makes it difficult to know where the line goes.
      Aw, now don't let scandals at Enron, WorldCom, Adelphia, HealthSouth, Qwest, Apple, Broadcom, UnitedHealth, Comverse Tech., etc. get you down on American business ethics! lol!
    • Thanks a lot, now my eyes are going to hurt the rest of the day. :(

  • the US lead should come as no surprise, considering the capitalist way of life and the high level of technical knowledge

    Um, what? Perhaps he means that since we have food to eat and our basic needs are taken care of, that we naturally spend our time writing malware. Apparently people should never have liberty and prosperity, since they obviously lead to (or are intrinsically) vice!

    How about reporting what percentage of a country's total software output is malware? Or at the very least, acknowledging th

  • I was employed for a while by U.S. company/enterpreneur, who seemed to be walking along thin line of ethics in engineering, as we'd understand it. Those were attempts to make graspable profit from online presence. Lucky I was not to be exposed to the parts, that would make me uncomfortable in my jobs. But there were more people hired, and at least half of them should have been not residents of U.S. (just as I am not) - some of them should have been doing parts, that were crossing into the darker side, I sus

  • Say what?! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by smooth wombat ( 796938 ) on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @08:31AM (#18413203) Journal
    and the high level of technical knowledge.


    If Americans did have a high level of technical knowledge, the amount of spyware infections (and related matters) would be significantly lower. Considering we lead the world in malware creation, that argues for a lower level of technical knowledge.

    Punch the monkey to win money! Give us your email address and we'll send you free offers! Install this program to prevent infections!

    Let's put it this way: I went to the dentist recently and the girl who was going to scrape my teeth asked what I did and where I worked. When I told her I work in IT and for a specific government agency, she said that she wished she knew more about computers but she didn't have the time to figure them out.

    So, we have someone who admits they don't know enough about a subject yet aren't willing to take the time to learn more about it. Yup, this America. If it isn't easy, we're not interested.

    • Two things:
      1.) The US does have a fairly high level of technical knowledge. Perhaps the average person off the street couldn't write malware, but there are tons of self-taught and university educated people in the US that could. The knowledge required is widely available and not too difficult to procure.

      2.) Just because someone would like to know more about something but doesn't take the time to learn about it hardly means they're lazy or stupid. It simply means their priorities are different. I'd love
  • USA! USA!

  • Malicious Activity, not Malware! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rhets ( 892663 ) on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @09:35AM (#18413987)
    Did the author of this post even read the paper? The U.S. leads the world in Malicious Activity, this is very different from malware. Malicious Activity = phishing sites, attacks, command and control servers, bots, spam zombies and malicious code infections. The United States is the top country for the combination of all of these things. The paper does not state anywhere that the United States is the source of the most malware!
  • At last, America is a technical leader again!
  • We're number one! We're number one! We're number one! Take that China!
  • Let's be realistic.

    The past six years has been rather hard on the American programmer.

    We were pretty much always looked down on by the rest of society as a bunch of geeks, and no small number of us were picked on growing up just because we were studious and not particularly into sports. For a few years in the late nineties, we got a little bit of respect, and it was good. But we got deluged with carpetbaggers who claimed to be programmers after a weekend HTML course, until the word "programmer" barely meant
    • I certainly understand your grief, Hermit.

      It seems all the sciences/engineering/tech fields got hit. Anything where lots of effort went into training.

      I can understand the businessmen and their concerns about getting cheaper skilled labor. Its the same concern I have when I can get cheaper stuff.

      My main concern is with Congress, and how they've been passing all this one-sided law.

      Outsourcing labor, Fine! But what happens if I try to buy a CD which is cheaper in China than here? Can't do that! Its a

Slashdot Top Deals

Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man -- who has no gills. -- Ambrose Bierce

Close