MEPIS Community Forum

A Linux operating system based on Debian Stable
View unanswered posts | View unsolved topics | View active topics |



Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Lack of any security for 20% of computers 
Author Message
MEPIS Guide
MEPIS Guide
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:59 pm
Posts: 2841
Has thanked: 402 times
Have thanks: 436 times
Post # 300698
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
lucky9 wrote:
I can foresee a time when it will be illegal to expose a computer to the Internet without some form of protection. Maybe to even just sell one without a virus checker.

I can see that happening, but I fear it would be just one more unenforceable law.

_________________
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3, AMD FX-6100 hex-core, 3.3GHz, Radeon HD6570
Gigabyte A55M-DS2, AMD A4-3400 dual-core APU (llano), 2.7 GHz, Radeon HD graphics
IBM ThinkPad T43, Intel Pentium M, 1.73GHz, Intel chipset


Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:12 pm
Profile
MEPIS Enthusiast
MEPIS Enthusiast
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 10:42 pm
Posts: 3930
Has thanked: 94 times
Have thanks: 756 times
Post # 300701
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
lucky9 wrote:
I can foresee a time when it will be illegal to expose a computer to the Internet without some form of protection.


You mean outlaw stupid?

_________________
Asus M4A87TD USB3 AMD 870 Socket AM3
Athlon II X4 630 2.8GHz Quad Core
GeForce 9500 GT 1GB PCIe, nVidia TwinView
Kingston 2G x 2 1333 DDR3
WD Caviar 500GB x 2 SATA hdd


Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:33 pm
Profile
MEPIS Guide
MEPIS Guide
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 11:53 am
Posts: 2553
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Has thanked: 757 times
Have thanks: 611 times
Post # 300704
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
Quote:
You mean outlaw stupid?

In most countries the law makers should think that's to close to suicide. They would rather do the opposite to silence all the nagging.
Henry


Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:59 pm
Profile
MEPIS Guide
MEPIS Guide
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:59 pm
Posts: 2841
Has thanked: 402 times
Have thanks: 436 times
Post # 300707
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
DBeckett wrote:
lucky9 wrote:
I can foresee a time when it will be illegal to expose a computer to the Internet without some form of protection. Maybe to even just sell one without a virus checker.

I can see that happening, but I fear it would be just one more unenforceable law.

Anyway, such a law would be absolutely pointless. In the case I cited above for example, the thing blew right past the installed and updated AV.

Of course, that wouldn't stop lawmakers from wasting a lot of time on such useless legislation. As Uncle Mark points out, you can't fix stoopid.

_________________
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3, AMD FX-6100 hex-core, 3.3GHz, Radeon HD6570
Gigabyte A55M-DS2, AMD A4-3400 dual-core APU (llano), 2.7 GHz, Radeon HD graphics
IBM ThinkPad T43, Intel Pentium M, 1.73GHz, Intel chipset


Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:17 pm
Profile
MEPIS Enthusiast
MEPIS Enthusiast
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 10:42 pm
Posts: 3930
Has thanked: 94 times
Have thanks: 756 times
Post # 300708
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
DBeckett wrote:
Anyway, such a law would be absolutely pointless. In the case I cited above for example, the thing blew right past the installed and updated AV.


No one is immune, and anyone can get bit. The question is, how much time, energy, and resources can/will one invest to limit one's vulnerability to the greatest extent? Where does the point of diminishing returns take over? It's like Zeno's Paradox -- you can approach a fully secure environment, but never quite get there.

Let's say the MSE is 90% effective, and MBAM Pro is 90% effective on the remaining 10%. That's 99%. Pretty darn good. But maybe Avira is 95% effective, and MBAM is still 90% effective on the remaining 5%. You end up at 99.5%. If MSE has benefits over Avira other than its detection rate (fewer false positives, for example, or ease of use, i.e. set-and-forget), do they outweigh that 0.5% increase in presumed protection?

In my opinion, for the users I support, they do.

Of course, if it wasn't for freaking iTunes, I'd have my users running Linux. If I'm going to put myself out of business by locking down Windows installs to the point that they never get infected, I might as well do it right.

_________________
Asus M4A87TD USB3 AMD 870 Socket AM3
Athlon II X4 630 2.8GHz Quad Core
GeForce 9500 GT 1GB PCIe, nVidia TwinView
Kingston 2G x 2 1333 DDR3
WD Caviar 500GB x 2 SATA hdd


Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:51 pm
Profile
MEPIS is cool!
MEPIS is cool!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 12:50 am
Posts: 676
Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Has thanked: 70 times
Have thanks: 71 times
Post # 300721
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
And where have we heard this before?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18288710

_________________
Research, Research, Research, Before You Walk The Plank.
Registered Linux User # 398829


Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:38 pm
Profile
MEPIS Enthusiast
MEPIS Enthusiast
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:54 am
Posts: 10333
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma U.S.A.
Has thanked: 3252 times
Have thanks: 753 times
Post # 300724
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
Perhaps something like a Drivers License? Required before you can legally connect? That doesn't fix stoopid but it might help the simply non-enlightened.

_________________
Yes, even I am dishonest. Not in many ways, but in some. Forty-one, I think it is.
--Mark Twain


Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:52 am
Profile
MEPIS Guide
MEPIS Guide

Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 12:47 pm
Posts: 1405
Location: Savannah, GA
Has thanked: 82 times
Have thanks: 265 times
Post # 300823
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
uncle mark wrote:
DBeckett wrote:
Let's say the MSE is 90% effective, and MBAM Pro is 90% effective on the remaining 10%. That's 99%. Pretty darn good. But maybe Avira is 95% effective, and MBAM is still 90% effective on the remaining 5%. You end up at 99.5%. If MSE has benefits over Avira other than its detection rate (fewer false positives, for example, or ease of use, i.e. set-and-forget), do they outweigh that 0.5% increase in presumed protection?


Too many assumptions. There may be no extra detection using it along with MSE until your system is already infected with something missed by them. ;-)

Actually, the last detection test of Malwarebytes I saw (granted it was a couple of years back) showed that Malwarebytes was nowhere near as good as most of the mainstream AV products (only detecting something like 77% of the samples used for tests).

It's just a lot better than most at malware removal (and detection of stuff that shouldn't be running in memory). It was especially bad with root kits. That may have changed by now. But, I wouldn't assume that it detects any more than other products (just because you're using more than one product doesn't mean that you have a higher overall detection rate). It's just better at getting rid of stuff that others don't see with an already infected system (as malware can more easily hide from many AV scanners and Malwarebytes is better at finding them when they're trying to hide than some products around).

But, as the old saying goes, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". So, it's best not to get infected to begin with, so that you don't need products like Malwarebytes to help out. ;-)


Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:17 pm
Profile
MEPIS Guide
MEPIS Guide
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:59 pm
Posts: 2841
Has thanked: 402 times
Have thanks: 436 times
Post # 300825
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
JimC wrote:
But, as the old saying goes, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". So, it's best not to get infected to begin with, so that you don't need products like Malwarebytes to help out. ;-)

As the old saying goes, "Easier said than done."

Hence, this thread.

_________________
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3, AMD FX-6100 hex-core, 3.3GHz, Radeon HD6570
Gigabyte A55M-DS2, AMD A4-3400 dual-core APU (llano), 2.7 GHz, Radeon HD graphics
IBM ThinkPad T43, Intel Pentium M, 1.73GHz, Intel chipset


Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:51 pm
Profile
MEPIS Guide
MEPIS Guide

Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 12:47 pm
Posts: 1405
Location: Savannah, GA
Has thanked: 82 times
Have thanks: 265 times
Post # 300826
Post Re: Lack of any security for 20% of computers
I do it the cautious way...

See the products I'm using in my previous posts, where I have multiple AV programs used for detection, as well as the Comodo Firewall on top of that (which basically looks at program behavior and requires my OK for virtually anything a new program wants to do). IOW, it's a "white list" approach versus using a "black list" approach that you'd get with signature only based detection.

Basically, it's treating any program as "guilty until proven innocent", so that virtually anything a new program wants to do (updating registry entries, comm settings, etc.) requires my OK until the system "learns" my answers and lets it work normally. That results in more warning screens that I have to OK with new programs. But, I'd rather put up with the extra warnings versus risking a malware infection because something is modifying system files and settings without my knowledge that isn't caught by other AV products I'm running.


Mon Jun 04, 2012 4:17 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: richb and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Protected by Anti-Spam ACP Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.