You must set the ad_network_ads.txt file to be writable (check file name as well).
Malware and personal responsibility [Archive] - RonFez.net Messageboard

PDA

View Full Version : Malware and personal responsibility


boosterp
10-03-2009, 11:07 PM
In some recent reading from various security firms and antivirus giants it can be induced (deduced is a different form of logic) that most malware infections hit and are transmitted via poorly protected consumer computers. While this has been true for for at least the past 5 years one computer guru must ask these questions:

1) Why is current security software not mandatory for consumer computers?

2) Why are consumers with unprotected computers not punished in some manner?
a) What would the appropriate punishment be?
b) Who would regulate this process? ICAAN?

3) Are consumers educated enough to be allowed to access the internet?
a) Should there be training and/or testing for users to purchase a computer?

4) What are the possible implications of not implementing some sort of policy to regulate the need for malware protection?

5) OR do we continue on the trend that may lead to malware affecting more than 50% of all consumer computers and the internet pathways becoming worse than rush hour traffic? Malware will only become more complicated and exploitative.

What are y'all's thoughts?

PapaBear
10-03-2009, 11:23 PM
I often get annoyed by the stupid shit that people do to their comps, then ask me to repair (after I've told them how to avoid such problems). However... There is one chick in particular that doesn't bother me as much. She has a grasp of what to avoid, but she lets her less intelligent family members use her comp, and they mess it up. I go over to fix it for her, I berate her for letting people fuck with her comp, and then she fucks me.

Aqualad
10-05-2009, 01:02 AM
1) Why is current security software not mandatory for consumer computers?

2) Why are consumers with unprotected computers not punished in some manner?
a) What would the appropriate punishment be?
b) Who would regulate this process? ICAAN?

3) Are consumers educated enough to be allowed to access the internet?
a) Should there be training and/or testing for users to purchase a computer?

4) What are the possible implications of not implementing some sort of policy to regulate the need for malware protection?

5) OR do we continue on the trend that may lead to malware affecting more than 50% of all consumer computers and the internet pathways becoming worse than rush hour traffic? Malware will only become more complicated and exploitative.

What are y'all's thoughts?


My alls thoughts is if I'm paying you to fix my computer, skip the lecture and fix my damn computer.

sailor
10-05-2009, 03:01 AM
My alls thoughts is if I'm paying you to fix my computer, skip the lecture and fix my damn computer.

i think he's saying it's akin to letting people drive on roads with no set rules, or heck, letting terrorists attach bombs to their cars and setting them free to drive around unwittingly. they're not only affecting themselves. these users acting recklessly are fuckin' things up for everyone else as well.

boosterp
10-05-2009, 07:18 AM
i think he's saying it's akin to letting people drive on roads with no set rules, or heck, letting terrorists attach bombs to their cars and setting them free to drive around unwittingly. they're not only affecting themselves. these users acting recklessly are fuckin' things up for everyone else as well.

Thank you.

Aqualad
10-05-2009, 08:06 AM
Why not crack down on the people who make and distribute this malware? Or work to improve the antivirus software?
I don't see why innocent computer users should be punished because they're not as "smart" as the tech guys.

boosterp
10-05-2009, 08:21 AM
Why not crack down on the people who make and distribute this malware? Or work to improve the antivirus software?
I don't see why innocent computer users should be punished because they're not as "smart" as the tech guys.

Antimalware programs work, it is the users that either fail to update the software, disable it, or never install it in the first place. So the improving software argument is baseless.

As for going after these people who write malware, that's tough thanks to the multinational reach of the internet. US law can not investigate or go after someone from China because the user of that computer is thought to have helped create a virus. That is China's responsibility but then if you know the tech side of malware it is usually a collaborative design so even more difficult to trace.

Aqualad
10-05-2009, 08:35 AM
Antimalware programs work, it is the users that either fail to update the software, disable it, or never install it in the first place. So the improving software argument is baseless.

As for going after these people who write malware, that's tough thanks to the multinational reach of the internet. US law can not investigate or go after someone from China because the user of that computer is thought to have helped create a virus. That is China's responsibility but then if you know the tech side of malware it is usually a collaborative design so even more difficult to trace.

This is why computer people and non-computer people can't get along. As a non-computer person all I see in statements like these is "You're too stupid to operate your machine."

boosterp
10-05-2009, 08:59 AM
This is why computer people and non-computer people can't get along. As a non-computer person all I see in statements like these is "You're too stupid to operate your machine."

No, just means you have a responsibility to keep up with your antivirus, etc. software. Make sure it's updated and your subscriptions are up to date. A weekly check is all you need, 5 minutes, and you are done. Computer will be safe enough to avoid 95% of all threats.

red_red_red
10-05-2009, 09:02 AM
No, just means you have a responsibility to keep up with your antivirus, etc. software. Make sure it's updated and your subscriptions are up to date. A weekly check is all you need, 5 minutes, and you are done. Computer will be safe enough to avoid 95% of all threats.
my anti virus updates it's self, fuck the 5 min a week, i don't have 5 min for that shit!

ha!

Death Metal Moe
10-05-2009, 10:26 AM
In some recent reading from various security firms and antivirus giants it can be induced (deduced is a different form of logic) that most malware infections hit and are transmitted via poorly protected consumer computers. While this has been true for for at least the past 5 years one computer guru must ask these questions:

1) Why is current security software not mandatory for consumer computers?

2) Why are consumers with unprotected computers not punished in some manner?
a) What would the appropriate punishment be?
b) Who would regulate this process? ICAAN?

3) Are consumers educated enough to be allowed to access the internet?
a) Should there be training and/or testing for users to purchase a computer?

4) What are the possible implications of not implementing some sort of policy to regulate the need for malware protection?

5) OR do we continue on the trend that may lead to malware affecting more than 50% of all consumer computers and the internet pathways becoming worse than rush hour traffic? Malware will only become more complicated and exploitative.

What are y'all's thoughts?

Having just had to re-install Windows on my uncle's computer over the past 2 days, your topic hits very close to home. Ya know what their problem was? His kids just open whatever they want, download whatever they want and install whatever they want. Guess what happened? They lost a lot of family photos and videos they didn't have backed up, even AFTER I fucking spent 4 hours a few months ago patching up their computer problems just enough to allow them to use their DVD-R drive and internet again.

On the flipside, I'm not sure I want there to be punishment. That makes me think of only one thing:

Monitoring of your connection.

I don't really want anyone monitoring what and how I'm using my connection. I mean an elderly person's infected computer might be doing the same amount of data transfer as my connection with torrents and MMO's playing. How will we find out what all the data transfers are doing on each person's computer? I don't like the sound of it at all.

I'm all for mandatory, preloaded, free anti-virus and malware programs from the OEMs.

boosterp
10-05-2009, 10:41 AM
Having just had to re-install Windows on my uncle's computer over the past 2 days, your topic hits very close to home. Ya know what their problem was? His kids just open whatever they want, download whatever they want and install whatever they want. Guess what happened? They lost a lot of family photos and videos they didn't have backed up, even AFTER I fucking spent 4 hours a few months ago patching up their computer problems just enough to allow them to use their DVD-R drive and internet again.

On the flipside, I'm not sure I want there to be punishment. That makes me think of only one thing:

Monitoring of your connection.

I don't really want anyone monitoring what and how I'm using my connection. I mean an elderly person's infected computer might be doing the same amount of data transfer as my connection with torrents and MMO's playing. How will we find out what all the data transfers are doing on each person's computer? I don't like the sound of it at all.

I'm all for mandatory, preloaded, free anti-virus and malware programs from the OEMs.

Not monitoring, that would violate the open internet idea but more like identification. Bits of data are tagged with tid bits of information. When an infection begins to strike it is difficult to determine who started it because they are clever at hiding their tracks, but normal users are not this clever. So, when malware hits an unprotected computer and uses Outlook's contact list to mail itself to more computers it can be determined where that malware struck, reproduced, and set out to infect others. In this case there is a history pointing to the computers that were infected and this is how you make that determination. In other words you take a chunk of malware, examine it, and you can tell where it struck in some cases.

Aqualad
10-05-2009, 12:01 PM
You're doing something right, booster, because youve convinced me to download updates for the first time in I don't know how long. And you're right, it didn't take long at all.

moochcassidy
10-05-2009, 12:12 PM
i think he's saying it's akin to letting people drive on roads with no set rules, or heck, letting terrorists attach bombs to their cars and setting them free to drive around unwittingly. they're not only affecting themselves. these users acting recklessly are fuckin' things up for everyone else as well.

is there somewhere we can invade to contain this?

Crossweird
10-05-2009, 12:30 PM
i think he's saying it's akin to letting people drive on roads with no set rules, or heck, letting terrorists attach bombs to their cars and setting them free to drive around unwittingly. they're not only affecting themselves. these users acting recklessly are fuckin' things up for everyone else as well.

Wouldn't it be more like letting terrorists drive with bombs that would only blow up other terrorists with bombs?

topless_mike
10-05-2009, 12:51 PM
booster
i agree with you on all these points, except for:

2) Why are consumers with unprotected computers not punished in some manner?

i'm not a big fan of being told what i "have" to do. if i choose to not protect my comp, thats my choice.

another point. dont all os's come with some sort of anti-virus already? if so, then why arent they more proactive? by proactive, i mean already scheduled. the software updates upon each connection, and runs 1x per week by default UNLESS it is changed by the user. this would keep the "non-computer" folk in the loop if it does it automatically.
the av's would also have to be less "resource wasteful" i dumped mcafee because it was such a resource whore. i run avast now, do a scan once per week along with a malware bytes scan.

the problem is that the bad guys will always be a step ahead of the a/v folk.

west milly Tom
10-05-2009, 12:55 PM
No, just means you have a responsibility to keep up with your antivirus, etc. software. Make sure it's updated and your subscriptions are up to date. A weekly check is all you need, 5 minutes, and you are done. Computer will be safe enough to avoid 95% of all threats.

I run avast and malaware and in a recent scan (two days ago) found 17 threats. It updates itself. What then?

topless_mike
10-05-2009, 12:57 PM
I run avast and malaware and in a recent scan (two days ago) found 17 threats. It updates itself. What then?

stay off www.brownlove.com

west milly Tom
10-05-2009, 12:59 PM
stay off www.brownlove.com

lol, xnxx.com is more my speed. also tpb doesn't help.

BlackSpider
10-05-2009, 01:03 PM
I don't believe in viruses...

instrument
10-05-2009, 01:10 PM
These people do pay for not protecting their comps, they pay people to fix them.

Or they sucker some family friend into doing it.

My aunt called me one day when she was about to "pay" for that fake anti viral virus.... I have to wonder how many people actually share their cc info with a virus.

BlackSpider
10-05-2009, 01:12 PM
These people do pay for not protecting their comps, they pay people to fix them.

Or they sucker some family friend into doing it.
My aunt called me one day when she was about to "pay" for that fake anti viral virus.... I have to wonder how many people actually share their cc info with a virus.

No I don't...

Devo37
10-05-2009, 01:15 PM
My alls thoughts is if I'm paying you to fix my computer, skip the lecture and fix my damn computer.

the people that ask me to help them with their computers don't pay me, it's friends and family that just assume since "i know computers", that i have nothing better to do with my day than to fix their bug-infested pc's.

the worst are people who want to stand right over my shoulder feigning interest and asking a million questions about what i'm doing to clean their pc, even though 6 months later they're gonna have the same problems all over again! :annoyed:

boosterp
10-05-2009, 01:29 PM
You're doing something right, booster, because youve convinced me to download updates for the first time in I don't know how long. And you're right, it didn't take long at all.

And your data is more secure.

booster
i agree with you on all these points, except for:

2) Why are consumers with unprotected computers not punished in some manner?

i'm not a big fan of being told what i "have" to do. if i choose to not protect my comp, thats my choice.

another point. dont all os's come with some sort of anti-virus already? if so, then why arent they more proactive? by proactive, i mean already scheduled. the software updates upon each connection, and runs 1x per week by default UNLESS it is changed by the user. this would keep the "non-computer" folk in the loop if it does it automatically.
the av's would also have to be less "resource wasteful" i dumped mcafee because it was such a resource whore. i run avast now, do a scan once per week along with a malware bytes scan.

the problem is that the bad guys will always be a step ahead of the a/v folk.

Two points:
First, many OSs do not come with built in antimalware. For example, I am a long time Linux user and in the past year or so use Ubuntu on one computer and Mandriva on my primary laptop. The Linux kernal (core) itself can be vulnerable but there is a firewall that I downloaded and set to run, all secure. Now I just keep up with all system updates.

Windows is not so lucky. They even have Windows' Defender from MS which sucks at rooting out malware. This is why you have your Norton, Zone Alarm, etc. and when you go to a Best Buy they try to sell you a 2 year sub to a security suite. There are freebes too such as AVG (my favorite of the free) and free Zone Alarm. If a consumer can not afford or does not want to pay for Norton than they should be "required" to get the free protection.

Second point, heuristics. More so on your paid products you have a heuristic setting that will usually catch something suspicious and stop it before causing harm. You do not need to have the latest definition of the most current threat to be protected.


I run avast and malaware and in a recent scan (two days ago) found 17 threats. It updates itself. What then?

What were the threats? Tracking cookies are not malware but can register as a threat. Also Avast (and this is why I no longer endorse them) is a big step behind in heuristics on their free product. This means that you can possibly get infected even if you are current. Now, where Avast and some of the other free ones do their job is not allowing the virus, trojan, keylogger, etc. do it's job. You may have an infection but I doubt it could replicate or get data out if you are up to date.

sailor
10-05-2009, 04:29 PM
is there somewhere we can invade to contain this?

pennsauken, nj and ashburn, va.