The myth of computer security

2010 June 1

by Andy Kaiser
Article ID: 1411

“The computer: an extension of the human intellect.

…soon, the ultimate tool will become the ultimate enemy.”

- Tron (1982)

Greetings, programs!

Let me tell you about a myth, a story, a fable that’s been concocted and perpetuated by certain groups in the media. It’s a story about how – with proper protection – your computer is immune to cyber attacks, viruses and other malware.

That’s the story but it’s not true. I’m talking about the myth of computer security.

There’s no conspiracy here, just unprepared software. Microsoft and various security companies are doing their best against the bad guys, who are attacking faster and more creatively than the good guys can keep up.

The days of the independent lone hacker are gone. They’re still around, of course, but the brunt of the malware industry is focused at a much higher level, where the bad guys are multinational groups, or are sponsored by enemy governments, or are run by organized crime syndicates.

So yes, there is a war. And the good guys are not winning.

With increased complexity comes increased chance of failure

The problem is that the methods of computer attack are so advanced, we need extremely complex software to protect against them. It’s so complex that security software sometimes causes more problems than it’s worth.

In May of 2010, the “Sunbelt Vipre Enterprise” antivirus software released updated versions of their malware protection, which they do multiple times per day. However, the update versions 6272, 6273 and 6274 caused the PC CPU to max out, essentially making the computer inoperable. The fix was to kill the Vipre process long enough to install the quickly-released patch, often requiring a system reboot.

That’s not too bad, right? It could be worse.

It could be, for example, like what happened in April 2010 with the McAfee VirusScan Enterprise product’s recent update version 5958. That update mistakenly identified a critical system process as being a virus. The result is that affected computers would crash and bluescreen and would no longer boot. The fix usually required a few minutes of physical access to the PC. Some unlucky users had to reinstall Windows.

I’m picking on these companies because they were recently in the news at the time I wrote this article. I can easily blame other antivirus products as well. In fact, I love McAfee VirusScan Enterprise – I’ve personally recommended it to and set it up for many of my clients. Same with Sunbelt’s Vipre Enterprise – in fact, that’s my employer’s current software of choice. They’re good products. But the very nature of what they’re meant to fix makes them complex, more invasive and unstable.

[Author's edit: Many readers took the above to mean that I endorse or recommend all versions of McAfee. Not true. I hate the preinstalled and retail McAfee junk. But the corporate-level, partner-resold McAfee software – "McAfee VirusScan Enterprise" is a good product, and is something a home user would never see. This is the only McAfee product I like. Unlike their bloated, ugly home versions, VSE is lightweight, has a tiny footprint, is super-functional and customizable, and is easily managed.

My goal in writing this section was not to recommend any AV package over another, but just to illustrate that no solution works really well, and all are open to self-inflicted damage.]

Remember that in the above cases with Vipre and McAfee, I’m not talking about single PCs in someone’s home. I’m talking about centralized networks of hundreds or thousands of computers. How would you like to be an IT admin that day, when you realize that one thousand of the computers you are responsible for are completely out of commission?

Phishing and user tricks

The previous examples are just problems where our protection fails us. But there is yet another class of malware, the kind that either tricks the user into installing it, or a kind that completely bypasses normal defenses.

Do you use Facebook? In May of 2010, thousands of Facebook users got messages from friends with this text:

this is hilarious! lol :P :P :P Distracting Beach Babes [HQ] Length: 5:32″

You being a red-blooded horny person, you click on the link, accept an installation prompt, and – boom! – you’re infected.

Okay, so you made a mistake. Fine.  You then go to a security seminar to learn more about protecting yourself. And who could better teach us than the technology giant IBM?

So you’re at the conference, and among the freebies IBM hands out are flash drives. You plug one into your computer, it auto-runs, and – boom! – your computer is infected.

This did happen to IBM at the May 2010 AusCERT security conference. IBM was one of the conference’s “Platinum Sponsors”, and they did hand out a bunch of virus-infected flash drives. Their response to fix the problem included these steps:

Turn off Windows System Restore (I estimate the time to do this is less than a minute)

Update your antivirus software and scan your system (perhaps an hour)

Scan your system with a second antivirus software (this would take another hour)

Back up all vital files (this might take 1-3 hours)

These aren’t so bad, until you get to the kicker:

As a “precautionary measure”, reinstall the operating system (based on the number of programs you have installed, this would take a long time and would require a lot of effort)

Did you notice anything about all of my examples? They all happened within two months of each other. I wasn’t even trying to do that. It’s easy to find such examples, and these just happened to be the most recent when I wrote this article. And they’re all high-profile with big impacts, both in time and money.

Botnets

None of these examples take into account a far more insidious attack vector: your own system may be compromised without you knowing it. Such systems are controlled by bad guys from a centralized location. Groups of these invisibly-controlled computers are called a “botnet”. Like an invisible on-demand army, a botnet uses your computer to attack large organizations (including government networks), and because of their large numbers are very effective, and the attack controller remains anonymous.

You can be infected and your computer brought into botnet control by rootkits and other hard-to-detect viruses. Methods of infection include everything already mentioned, and flaws in frequently-used software like Adobe Reader, Adobe Flash and Java.

Let me be clear on this: even if you have the latest Windows updates and up-to-the-minute antivirus software, you can still be infected with a virus. Easily.

So that’s scary. But let me be even scarier: even if all possible software is updated on your computer, you can still be tricked into installing something, including via email or by simply visiting an infected web page.

You may never intentionally install anything. You may not realize you’re being infected. But you are. And you’ll never know it.

The immune: Apple and Linux systems

With all the above said, there are people who will -  rightly – say that none of this applies to Apple or Linux machines. At the time of this writing, it’s true. Apple and Linux machines aren’t targets. Yet. This article only addresses issues with computers running Microsoft Windows. I did this because Windows is the most prevalent – currently taking about 90% of the market share – so it applies to most people. But at the rate Apple and Linux are climbing in popularity, their time will come. If they become prevalent enough, they will become targets, and they will be attacked.

If you’re running Windows, the security on your own systems is best protected by doing these things:

Keep updated: Make the aforementioned antivirus software updates, regularly update Microsoft Windows, and if you have them installed, regularly update Adobe Reader, Adobe Flash Player and Java.

Don’t visit bad sites: I know this may be hard for you to do, particularly for you porn lovers and file sharers (neither of which, in my opinion, are inherently bad things). But those sites contain a higher-than-average chance of exposure to virus installers.

Spam protection: Whatever your email method of choice happens to be, make sure you have spam protection. You’re taking chances without it. Even if you never ever EVER click on a link within a spammed email, you can still become infected simply by opening a bad email (via an attack method called HTML scripting).

Educate the users: this is the hard one, but in today’s world it’s required. You don’t drive a car without learning about gas fillups, tire pressure and oil changes. And you shouldn’t use a computer without knowing how to maintain its security. This includes knowing how to update the parts of the computer that need updating, and knowing what behavior is normal and what is not. In my opinion, this should be required on a personal and corporate business level – particularly when user PCs have exposure to paychecks and bank accounts and other sensitive information.

The future of computer security

What’s going to happen next? There are a lot of possibilities, but I personally have a more pessimistic short-term outlook. I believe things will get worse before they get better. Malware writers have done some bad things, but haven’t yet affected governments and top-tier businesses enough to force significant changes.

And that, unfortunately, is what the industry needs. Without a large-impact attack, the industry (particularly Microsoft) has no real motivation to make significant, costly, fundamental changes to the security of their products. I don’t want this to happen, but I fear that’s what we need before we’ll get a proper fix.

In the meantime, what can we do? Speaking for myself, here’s what I do:

I keep everything updated. I pay attention to where I’m browsing, what sites I visit and what’s happening to my computer. I know enough about attack methods to realize when something isn’t right.

The most important point: I backup all important data.

Don’t be too depressed. The ratios are on our side: given the sheer numbers of PCs out there, most of us are a tiny fish in an ocean, and the predators probably won’t notice us. Our own obscurity is our protection.

But if you’re hit by a random or directed attack, good luck. Current computer security is so weak, so easily compromised, that even a supposed “properly protected” system is vulnerable to complete takeover. Weaknesses include the system itself as well as the always-flawed human user. So protect what you can, and educate to the extent you value your systems and data.

It’s an ugly world out there. And this article doesn’t even address the newest, up-and-coming attack vector: cellphones! But relax – the next time someone sends you an instant message, I’m sure you’ll be safe.

For now.

“You won, okay? This is just a game!”

“Not anymore.”

- Tron Legacy (2010)



Other articles related to this topic:

28 Comments
2010 June 1
Mike permalink

I stopped reading after you said you recommended McAfee. If you are one of the good guys, that explains why we’re losing.

2010 June 1
Steve Baughman permalink

You say “the good guys aren’t winning”… well all except for Apple and Linux it would appear.

2010 June 1
blue_carbuncle permalink

Now if only some of these bungholes would get prosecuted.  I had the person’s name IP and MAC that destroyed my system with malware.  I even launched a counterattack after their local law enforcement refused to do anything.  If you have the ability, vigilante these losers that destroy property.  Find them and kick their teeth in.  See if the feds would be willing to trace the attacks then…

2010 June 1

Mike,

>I stopped reading after you said you recommended McAfee.

Sounds to me like you don’t know your corporate-level AV solutions. As I said in the Fark thread about this:

…I’m not talking about the preinstalled junk (which I agree is horrible – I personally use Avast at home too). I’m talking about the corporate-level McAfee software – McAfee Enterprise. Completely different, and it’s not something a home user would ever see.
It’s the only McAfee product I like. Unlike their bloated, ugly home versions, this one is lightweight, has a tiny footprint, is super-functional and customizable, and is easily managed (assuming you can climb the goofy learning curve of the ePO).

2010 June 1

Steve,

>You say “the good guys aren’t winning”… well all except for Apple and Linux it would appear.

Not really. You didn’t read (or want to respond to) the section above titled “The immune: Apple and Linux systems“.

Andy

2010 June 1

blue_carbuncle,

If you live in the USA and experienced a cyber attack, make sure the FBI knows about it – report it to the Internet Crime Complaint Center (the IC3). If the crime is locatable to the USA, make sure to report it to the Attorney General of whatever state the crime came from.

(Though know that after submitting your case to the IC3, you will probably never get a response – they go after the big-money, big-impact cases. But they do investigate.  And if you and (for example) one thousand other people were hit by the same exploit, they’ll take more notice. But the FBI won’t know about it unless people tell them.)

Andy

2010 June 1
Anonymous Coward permalink

Both Mac and Linux machines are also being targeted, and the myth of macs being immune to viruses and other malware is being aggressively disproven. If anything, you should be shouting about how vulnerable they are. This, along with the recommendation to use McAfee really makes me wonder if you know what you’re talking about. Certainly it’s impossible to be online and 100% safe. However, it’s possible to be quite a lot safer than you’re assuming by simply using some additional security methods. McAfee by itself? No wonder you’re having problems.

2010 June 1

Anonymous Coward,

> This, along with the recommendation to use McAfee really makes me wonder if you know what you’re talking about.

Okay, I think I need to clarify directly in the article itself on my thoughts about McAfee.

That wasn’t part of my point, so I glossed over what apparently should’ve been made clear.

Off to make a small edit in the article. Here’s my point:

[Author's edit: Many readers took the above to mean that I endorse or recommend all versions of McAfee. Not true. I hate the preinstalled and retail McAfee junk. But the corporate-level, partner-resold McAfee software – "McAfee VirusScan Enterprise" is a good product, and is something a home user would never see. This is the only McAfee product I like. Unlike their bloated, ugly home versions, VSE is lightweight, has a tiny footprint, is super-functional and customizable, and is easily managed.

My goal in writing this section was not to recommend any AV package over another, but just to illustrate that no solution works really well, and all are open to self-inflicted damage.]

2010 June 1
Steve D permalink

It seems to me a fundamental change in architecture is required.
1. Software should reside in a physically separate memory from the workspace. It should be read-ONLY, meaning it is physically impossible to write from the workspace back to the ROM. In fact, since the only thing that this module will ever do is load software into RAM, there is no need for signals ever to travel to the ROM from RAM. What communication is necessary should be via a separate channel that remains closed (ideally with a physical break like a switch) except when necessary.
2. If 1. interferes with your copy-protection or other DRM, tough cookies.
3. There should be no auto-run of any kind. This includes pop-ups. Find another way to support your Web site.
4. It should be impossible to create a rootkit. OS’s should be capable of accessing that level of the computer.
5. All software should have a single point of contact with the user so that deleting the software deletes every trace of it.
6. Nothing executes without the specific action of the user. Especially, nothing from outside. That means software will have to be completely self-contained so the user doesn’t have to run 100 different DLL’s.
7. If these safeguards warp someone’s little brain, they can buy a regular old infectable computer. But create a line of ultra-secure computers for those who want them.
8. Turn your ‘pooter OFF at night. It will at least be eight hours less for bad guys to attack you, or use your computer in their botnet.

2010 June 1

blue_carbuncle wrote:
“I had the person’s name IP and MAC that destroyed my system. . . .”

Are you sure? It may have been a compromised system used as a proxy (perhaps the last in a series of proxies), and IP/MAC spoofing isn’t difficult.

You might find yourself being set up as a dupe, when you unknowingly take action against the hacker’s intended target of harassment – unintentionally doing their work for them.

2010 June 1
Tombsmen permalink

I am a current Systems Admin that is forced to use McAfee Enterprise Antivirus and Agent software, and no I would not offer it to a customer. McAfee has yet to remove any infection it has found when it does find them. I know for a fact your statement on its tiny foot print is a gigantic load.  As we have done system performance comparisons, McAfee Enterprise has shown its self to be a epidemic level system drain, to the point that systems department in other parts of our chain have either removed or replace the software for this exact reason.
That being said I whole heartedly agree with your stance on Apple and Linux/Unix Machines. Market share determines your position on potential attackers radar, or as our apple certified specialist puts it ” security through obscurity!”

2010 June 1
blue_carbuncle permalink

Thanks Andy  I might just follow up yet.
The IP was indeed probably his neighbor’s as he also gimped my wife’s docs and got a yahoo att DSL with a different IP.  Once I convinced them I wasn’t an illegal immigrant and changed the password on the account and PIN, the rest fell into place.  He probably had another 800 of me anyway lol.
It originally showed up as malware on the wife’s pc.  Went the usual forum digging, got malwarebytes, encountered the “it wont run” loop and hosed her pc and started over.  The thing that really cheesed me was that the wife was mad and someone had stolen from us.  The closest I got was going black (haven’t done anything since i met her lol) got some kiddy scripts after watching a youtube tutorial and let it do the rest for a good old buffer overflow (same ol same ol).  The site was down for three days after me, then up for three, and then went down for good.   I guess someone else much more capable took care of it lol.  I would recommend those with the power to do so, make them miserable.
Thanks again for the link and info Andy.  I promise to take the high road next time :)

2010 June 1

Hi Tombsmen,

Regarding McAfee, I simply haven’t experienced your issues, and I’ve been using McAfee Enterprise for the last 7 years, on 10+ companies, through version 8. This includes running it on high-powered machines as well as old, slow ones. I totally believe your experience – why would you lie? But please believe me when I say I’m not lying either. :) I don’t know your environment, so can’t really comment except to say that there’s no one software that will work well for everyone.

As far as not removing certain infections, that’s not limited to any one vendor. They all miss a lot, unfortunately. As I said in the article, “Microsoft and various security companies are doing their best against the bad guys, who are attacking faster and more creatively than the good guys can keep up.”

Personal option time: You might want to try Vipre (though be aware – just like McAfee Enterprise – you have to set it up and tweak the enterprise settings ahead of time – if you don’t, performance might suffer because your disk and CPU will be needlessly overworked and the users WILL notice). In our testing, it’s actually less of a footprint than McAfee. We’ve also used AVG, but my guys thought the centralized control is a pain. I recommend staying away from Symantec unless all your PCs are very high-end.

Good luck!

Andy

2010 June 2
Dann permalink

Kudos on mentioning Linux-based systems. However, you got your statistics wrong. The whole “Linux is 1% market share” thing comes from MS-funded studies and is even then only applicable in the US.

Based on certain leaked slides from Microsoft, GNU Linux has about 7% market share and Apple 5-6%. I wouldn’t be surprised if *BSD, *HURD, Amiga and BeOS made up a few percent as well. Windows is more likely around 80% market share on the desktop.

2010 June 2
Keeping Quiet permalink

And yet there are some of us thate deliberately download/run any and all types of malware on our systems with no realtime AV or even bothered with Windows Useless Update bloat.
Sandboxie, Defensewall, Geswall, Returnil and Shadow Defender to name some brilliant apps that when used correctly will keep you far safer than any blacklist scanner.
 

2010 June 2

Dann,

The whole “Linux is 1% market share” thing comes from MS-funded studies and is even then only applicable in the US. … Windows is more likely around 80% market share on the desktop.

Though I never said Linux is 1%, here’s where I got the information on Windows having 90% market share. (Scroll to the graph titled “Windows OS market share”.)

Andy

2010 June 3
nw10jf permalink

um, in the “immune” section, you cite the “security via obscurity myth” which is completely false.

There are linux viruses, very few but they exist, and linux is running a significant portion of enterprise servers. Mac OSX is also used in mission critical environments and by the united states military to maintain their web presence. There are also 50+ million macs online plus the 100 million iPhones/iPod Touches/iPads which all run OS X. None of these devices has ever had a virus. Period. There is not one virus in the wild for OS X. 

*there are about 9 trojans for the mac, and a couple of viruses for iPods running linux for some reason, but thats it.

Any Unix based system is significantly more secure than one based on CP/M (DOS), because it was designed from the beginning for networking.

this is why the argument of something not being a target makes no sense, if it’s not a target because of a smaller audience, then it would be as easy to infect those machines with self propogating viruses, they would just have an equivalent percentage of the malware. They do not. at all.

This assertion in your article is wrong.

2010 June 3

nw10jf,

this is why the argument of something not being a target makes no sense, if it’s not a target because of a smaller audience, then it would be as easy to infect those machines with self propogating viruses, they would just have an equivalent percentage of the malware. They do not. at all.

This assertion in your article is wrong.

So you’re saying that because Macs are 8% of the market share (that percentage may not be correct – I’m just picking a number as an example), then 8% of the viruses out there should be Mac viruses?

I don’t agree. If I’m a bad guy choosing who I target, why would I put any effort into infecting systems that give a lower rate of return? I’d pick victims that are the prevalent, low-hanging fruit. I would attack Microsoft Windows.

As you said, a system’s inherent security plays a part. Something that’s designed for networking is more secure than something that’s not. I agree. But I don’t think that’s the main reason for the current Mac/Linux “immunity”: in terms of who gets attacked, it’s a case of return on investment. Max payoff for the effort.

Andy

2010 June 3

Andy, great article. As an IT worker myself, I think this write-up is a good resource for the many non-technically inclined friends and relatives I have. Also, f— the nay-sayers on McAfee. Their enterprise solution is great, as is Sophos.

2010 June 3

Thanks, Aiden!  I tried to get the point across without being too technical. Hopefully it worked.

It’s also good to know your McAfee experience, too. Haven’t tried Sophos yet, but I’ll put that on my list!

2010 June 3
nw10jf permalink

Andy,
The part of my response you quoted was not my entire point. My point is that if something was secure simply by not being a target, then it would be just as simple to write a self propogating piece of malware/virus for that platform as the one with the major slice of the market. But, no one has been able to successfully do it in 10 years time (OS X debuted in 2000 as a beta) although many have tried.
My point is simply that the design of that “immune” system is more secure and has not been successfully attacked at all in 10 years. 0. That is not obscurity, or un targeted, that is by design. Otherwise, Google made a really horrible security decision by switching to macs and linux completely and i would consider them a ‘high value’ target. Also, a ‘high value’ target?… Apple. Who runs their entire company on nothing but OS X machines and servers…I would think someone would want to crack them open. And when the us military switched to Apple Xserves and OS X to run their web presence and internal electronic security? I would think they are a ‘high value’ target. Also, the NSA, CIA, FBI, and the White House all have recently made the switch to Linux and OSX servers and client machines?
The truth is that the most expensive and sensitive material in the private and public sector are protected with some type of Unix distribution. This is not an accident. When was the last time any of those named above suffered a breach? (excluding the windows IE breach that made google switch to Macs and Linux).

2010 June 3

nw10jf,

Thanks for the clarification! I see your point. And thanks for the detail. Personally (in case you haven’t guessed), I’d call myself an expert at Microsoft operating systems, but just a novice at both Linux and Macs.

I should’ve given your point more emphasis in my own article, or changed my implied ratio about “obscurity versus inherent security”. I still think my original point about “value for the effort” is legit, but yours can’t be denied either. You make a good case, and I support it.

Andy

2010 June 5

I don’t think anyone responded to Steve D’s mindless post, because A) his ideas are 89% illogical or bull. B) He didn’t read the original article so he’s just trolling with his “here’s what you need: blah blah blah”. C) It’s fun to poke at people’s silly comments.
It seems to me a fundamental change in architecture is required.
It’s called UNIX and LINUX…alternatives do exist. You’re speaking as an idealist and not a pragmatist. The idealists have moved to the aforementioned OS’s. The rest of us are going to do as we’ve always been doing more mindfully. Andy is right in the article about absolute protection as a myth, but hell, smoking doesn’t cause cancer, it increases the risk of cancer. Correlation doesn’t equate to causation. Following what he’s mentioned will reduce the risks.
1. Software should reside in a physically separate memory from the workspace. It should be read-ONLY, meaning it is physically impossible to write from the workspace back to the ROM. In fact, since the only thing that this module will ever do is load software into RAM, there is no need for signals ever to travel to the ROM from RAM. What communication is necessary should be via a separate channel that remains closed (ideally with a physical break like a switch) except when necessary.
Do you really think the hundreds of thousands of computer engineers out there were so stupid they haven’t contemplated this idea before? If it was located on ROM it’s more firmware than software anymore. And please explain the technical implementations of a “separate channel”. A physical switch eh? A write-protect on a USB stick is mighty handy, and unfortunately they don’t have too many of those floating around in the market place anymore, however have you ever operated one of those? It’s annoying if you are reading/writing things to it, then having to lock it up, then having to unlock it again. It like an OS requires writing constantly because processes and files can’t be static or compartmentalized. There’s something called “sandboxing” and a “virtual machine” yet even those have their drawbacks.
2. If 1. interferes with your copy-protection or other DRM, tough cookies.
Tough cookies?! This is DRM heaven! ROM media means READ ONLY meaning people couldn’t copy off the information. Maybe the music industry will buy your idea, best of luck to them in implementing it. They have the ROM media but not the platform.
3. There should be no auto-run of any kind. This includes pop-ups. Find another way to support your Web site.
I think you didn’t read the article at all, if you don’t read the article and you make wonky irrelevant statements. First off programs that automatically run at startup can be both beneficial and detrimental, ie the JAVA updater, which takes some system resources, but notifies and downloads the latest update pushed out so you don’t get those pop-ups.
Second off, if you have HTML code, you have the ability to create a popup, if you have Firefox or a later version of IE, you can block that pop-up. If you have Java installed and a java popup comes up, you have the option of not using java. What are you trying to say here?! Let’s make pie fall out of sky, nevermind water does in reality but if we want pie, we will get pie! Do you live in the 90′s to still have this issue?
4. It should be impossible to create a rootkit. OS’s should be capable of accessing that level of the computer.
It should also be impossible to commit crimes and hurt people’s feelings when they write nonsensical blog comments. oops. Again, permissions, UAC that try to prevent access at the kernel level get overrun.
5. All software should have a single point of contact with the user so that deleting the software deletes every trace of it.
That’s why people like portable applications, however you’re forgetting many of these programs rely on writing to the registry…WHEN IN DOUBT SWITCH TO APPLE!!
6. Nothing executes without the specific action of the user. Especially, nothing from outside. That means software will have to be completely self-contained so the user doesn’t have to run 100 different DLL’s.
Portable applications… again it’s your choice to install an app or find a portable version of it, or make a portable version of it. And have you heard of Windows UAC? That’s the idea behind it, but it doesn’t work because people become trained to just click OK. Also what you sound like you are trying to advocate for is different levels of access to the OS, however if you listened to any of the lectures Mark Russinovich (If you don’t know who this is, you don’t have the right to talk about Windows) gave, malware now evolving to operate even when there aren’t administrative options.
7. If these safeguards warp someone’s little brain, they can buy a regular old infectable computer. But create a line of ultra-secure computers for those who want them.
This is why I’m giving you so much shit, you think brain size is correlated to intelligence, an outdated school of thought (then again I didn’t expect someone with those creative comments above to understand neurobiology), and your pretentious statement reads “it’s my way or the highway” without remembering there are PLENTY of alternatives to the Windows OS that are more secure.

8. Turn your ‘pooter OFF at night. It will at least be eight hours less for bad guys to attack you, or use your computer in their botnet.

This isn’t the 90′s grandpa, when you go on a site with a java zero-day exploit it doesn’t matter how long your connection is open. This is 2010, everyone’s connection is open 24/7. Time is not the cause, an insecure system is. Again, stop coming onto sites and making your own frog-in-the-well comments with out at least reading the blog entry, it’s people like you with backwards ideas who don’t pay attention that get their computers infected.

2010 June 5
nw10jf permalink

thanks andy! Your value for effort point is legit, because if one bank is easier to crack into than another criminals will go for that, because it is not nearly as difficult to infiltrate.
cheers

2010 June 20

Okay, as an open source programmer & 3-D modelling artists: I’m gonna have a lot more to say…

But 1st I just wanted to say a few things: Welcome Back, *w00t!*, and *uber-thnx* for bringing back DBS’ podcast. I know I’m kinda late on the uptake . I do remember your announcement, of DBS podcast “death” and though I didn’t think I’d unsubscribed… well it turns out that I did.

Which makes my return to DBS, as a listener, all the sweeter. And as an uber-nerdette I love that you’ve addressed this issue. I have a ton of people who I’ll def be sharing this episode & article with. Thank you!

I’ll be back later to babble a whole bunch more. But I just wanted to, at least, send you my thank yous & welcome backs!

Please keep the podcasts coming & thnx again for all of your.
Take care & thnx again – Kaity G. B.

2010 June 28
K-man permalink

nw10jf — you care to cite any of your claims? only 9 trojans in 10 years of OS X? FBI, NSA, White house, united states military all on the mac or *nix? Those are some pretty wild claims.

You also confuse server and client security. They are not one in the same (if you think they are please elaborate) Servers are more secure just by the fact they are ran by professionals and are not used to “surf the web”. Client machines are used by anybody and everybody who are willing to click on anything and everything. Which will automatically bring those trojans back into the fold (which there are more than 9 of them btw)

All current attacks are targetting users to “install” (AKA Trojans)  something. FakeAV being real popular right now on the PC, Mac OS X being targetted with Screensaver Trojans.

I’d also assume you’d not take into consideration the Safari exploits and pwn2own. If you take that assumption, remove any IE and its associated plugins (adobe crap, java) from the windows picture too.

Apples to Apples (no pun intended), Windows 7 and Mac OS X are the same level security wise. This is a fact and not fan-boy dogma. I can actually cite some sources on the above if you want…

Andy-  Nice Job on the article. It’s true there is no true security and we are loosing badly in a cyber war right now that hardly no one knows about… check out Fatal System Error by Joseph Menn for a good read/listen on this very subject. (Ditto on the McAfee home being pure crap, while the enterprise stuff being tolerable or at least better then most home AV packages)

2010 July 2
nw10jf permalink

I can cite everything you need. Most of my knowledge is from first hand experience with the above. if you email me i will provide you with what i can, but will not do so on a public forum.

2010 July 13
Mike permalink

Obviously I’m a little late to the article, but I just happened upon it while browsing.  I feel the need to make a point.
The malware you are describing are not viruses, but are spyware/adware infections.  All of the security software names I saw mentioned are not really designed to handle spyware and adware because they are anti-virus programs.  Of course they are not going to work.  Despite what someone might believe and what anti-virus programs tell you, anti-virus and security suites that are supposed to be all in one protections are really only designed to handle viruses.  Only a dedicated anti-spyware/adware service would catch those types of threats (rogues, bot-nets, keyloggers, browser and homepage hijackers, most rootkits, etc…).
That’s not to say that newer threats (which are certainly flooding the net everyday) wouldn’t occasionally get through an anti-spyware/adware program.  There are just too many (not too mention each threat released umpteen amounts of variants that are released periodically to circumvent security software).  Even the most sophisticated research processes would require magic or technologies that don’t yet exist to find them all.  Though any anti-spyware/adware program worth its salt would offer  support and have reactive measures in place that would target the infection itself and don’t require a system wipe. A system wipe is the only thing an anti-virus or security suite could do since they aren’t designed to target the infection itself; they’ll most likely charge you to do it to boot.  A system wipe should always be the last resort, given that its a pain and costly to those who can not do it themselves.
Getting back to the idea of an “all in one” protection… Unfortunately most people (including A LOT of  “experts”) still lump all malware into the same category and use “virus” as a catch all term.  Viruses (I’ve read recently) are going the way of the Dodo and something like 98% of infections out there are adware/spyware related.  Viruses are one of the first types of malware, and have been around long enough to have spawned security companies now worth billions.  Those same companies would go out of business almost overnight given that they are not designed to handle the vast majority of current threats out there; they have to say they can catch them, but at best they have a small database of signature based spyware/adware infections and have no way of handling the heuristic based breed, which are far more prevalent and sophisticated.
Bottom line, viruses still exist, though your chances of encountering one drop every single day; so it is still needed, but much more importantly, anti-spyware/adware needs to be run to have a better defense.  It is true that computer security is a myth, being that infections will occasionally get through (with a will, a way, and billions of dollars in advertising and identity theft revenue at the bad guys disposal it’s a given)… but you won’t have it happen anywhere near as often if you use the right type of security.  And remember, if it’s a good service, they should, at the very least be able to deal with it quickly (unfortunately after the fact), and without any larger of a headache or hassle already given by the infection itself.
 

Comments are closed for this entry.