Virus Guy wrote:
> FromTheRafters wrote:
>
>>> Here's something for you, win9x isn't immune to it.
>>> http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00002341.html
>
> I've kill-filed Pustin, so the only way I see his screed is when someone
> else quotes it.
>
> In this case, he's posted a link to a description of the java
> vulnerability that pertains to the current issue with Macs (not sure why
> he did that). The content of the link contains no information specific
> to whether or not Win-98 is vulnerable.
>
> In any case, since Oriface patched the JRE a couple months ago, and
> since JRE version 6 does run under win-98 with kernelEx (and hence any
> patch to version 6 is therefore applicable to win-98) why would someone
> make a claim that win-98 is vulnerable?
>
> Any windoze OS is vulnerable if the patch isin't applied.

He probably wrote that because you often declare w9x to be immune from
modern malware. If this at one time was a zero day exploit, it debunks
that view.