Cisco's Talos team analysis of WannaCry worm

Re:Cisco's Talos team analysis of WannaCry worm by semi-extrinsic on Saturday May 13, 2017 @03:03AM (#14329850)

I recently tried to email someone a .tar.gz of some .py files, and their academic email (large US university, hosted gmail) refused to let it pass. I was left to wonder what kind of research they do there.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cisco's Talos team analysis of WannaCry worm by mattnewton on Saturday May 13, 2017 @06:22AM (#14330239)

Research with modern tooling like git?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cisco's Talos team analysis of WannaCry worm by themihai on Saturday May 13, 2017 @08:27AM (#14330616)

I still believe you should be able to send files through email. Why should I setup a git server( static ip + domain name) to share a piece of code? What's next? "Modern tooling" like Google Docs instead of local apps?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cisco's Talos team analysis of WannaCry worm by jlg23 on Saturday May 13, 2017 @10:58AM (#14331282)

> I still believe you should be able to send files through email.

Refusing to listen to what people have been telling you since the inception of email does not make you right, though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cisco's Talos team analysis of WannaCry worm by woah on Saturday May 13, 2017 @10:45AM (#14331231)

If it's too long to send in the body of the email, it should probably be in git.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cisco's Talos team analysis of WannaCry worm by gavingmiller on Saturday May 13, 2017 @10:07AM (#14331036)

Password protected zip. And/or wrap in another zip is usually enough to thwart Gmail

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cisco's Talos team analysis of WannaCry worm by phreeza on Saturday May 13, 2017 @06:17AM (#14330230)

I think gmail does the same sometimes?

[ Parent | on HN ]