Maybe you could tell them that the "separation of data & programs" that HP
built into the 3000 from the start, was the same thing as the "data execution
protection" that Intel added a few years ago, and that MPE has always had
built in "buffer overrun" protection.  Also, no activex, different machine
instruction set, etc.

Maybe also go techno-sarcastic on them and claim that MPE sys-admins &
programmers are smarter and less gullible than Wintel users, hence less likely
to fall for phishing schemes.  And MPE end-users don't have admin capability,
so they can't mess things up as badly as we could, unlike Wintel machines
where most users are logged on as administrators.  Also, nobody uses the 3000
to browse for porn, so the 3000 won't get infected by malicious web sites.
Also, I'd guess that few of us read email from the outside world on our 3000s,
so no nasty attachments would even get a chance to run even if they used
instructions the 3000 could understand.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Reid Baxter" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 11:03
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] MPE/iX Virus Vulnerability


> Joe,
>
> Thanks and yes we do use Vesoft Security/3000. I was looking for a more
> technically definitive answer though. I once recall seeing someone post
> (programmer perspective) a response that eluded to stacks, storage area,
> etc. based reasons that a virus could not exist within the MPE/iX OS
> architecture. Anyone recall that ? Wirt ? Stan ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Reid E. Baxter
>
<snip>

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *