Posted on 10/24/2006 6:47:46 PM PDT by Swordmaker
"When you have a few minutes," my father asked me on the phone last night, "could you help me with my antivirus stuff?" The trial version of Norton AntiVirus 2006 on his three-month-old Lenovo laptop was expiring, and he was bit confused by the upgrade warning, so he wanted me to help him through the transition. One of the options was to upgrade to Norton AntiVirus 2007, for $39 (after the $10 promotional coupon he got in e-mail). Sounded good to me.
"Sure," I said. "It should only take a few minutes." I took control of his computer via LogMeIn and set to work.
Nearly an hour and a half later, hungry and irritated, I hung up and disconnected. The upgrade was complete. My father said, "I could not have done this without you." He was right, and that's why I was mad.
The upgrade required a complete uninstallation of the the 2006 product, which took a good 10 or 15 minutes and required a reboot. The download and installation of the 2007 version took nearly an hour itself and required its own reboot. It also asked for registration information that duplicated the info my father had given when he bought the new software online, leading him to think he was starting over. There were choices to make that he didn't understand and offers for products he didn't need. At several times during the process the computer appeared to be locked, and my father was tempted to turn it off and reboot. Before we said our good-byes, my bewildered father said to me, "Can't you write something about this? Make them change?"
So this is for you, Dad.
For everyone else: Nobody should have to deal with this. When the antivirus subscription that came with your PC expires, don't immediately jump to renew or upgrade what you have. There may be a better product out there. Also, the next time you're thinking of getting a new computer, take a serious look at the Macintosh.
No, Yardstick. My homeschooled son had his own in-home computer business from the time he was 15 to 18. He made big money building, repairing PCs (although he was a serious Mac fanatic) I've seen it happen. In less than 60 seconds computers would be infected with viruses. Before he could upgrade on the net. He learned the HARD way. I saw it happen several times.
Now we're all Mac fanatics here, and I'm trying to get my bestest friend to switch. :D
I'm sorry, but this is just a tired old canard that really doesn't stand up to scrutiny, yet we see it here on every thread.
So, to make things easier, here's a post that addresses it. It is largely addressing the 'firefox isn't popular enough to get attacked by malware' FUD, but it applies here as well.
Yeah, that is something the Microsoft bashers don't realize. If 90% of us used Linux or Apples, then 90% of the viruses and spyware would be made for those systems.
What most Microsoft defenders don't realize is that the above is complete and total hogwash.
Firefox now has 10% of browser market share. While 10% may not sound like much it represents a huge number of users when you consider the total number of folks on the net. That also doesn't take into consideration that many people fake their browser responses to make it seem as though they are using IE so stupid websites that require IE for no legitimate reason will work.
Let's take one case in point to show how bogus the concept of "too few users to matter" really is. There are people out there who will write viruses to muck things up just because they can.
From the friendly article:
On Friday March 19, 2004 at approximately 8:45pm PST, an Internet worm began to spread, targeting a buffer overflow vulnerability in several Internet Security Systems (ISS) products, including ISS RealSecure Network, RealSecure Server Sensor, RealSecure Desktop, and BlackICE. The worm takes advantage of a security flaw in these firewall applications that was discovered earlier this month by eEye Digital Security. Once the Witty worm infects a computer, it deletes a randomly chosen section of the hard drive, over time rendering the machine unusable. The worm's payload contained the phrase "(^.^) insert witty message here (^.^)" so it came to be known as the Witty worm.
...
Witty infected only about a tenth as many hosts than the next smallest widespread Internet worm. Where SQL Slammer infected between 75,000 and 100,000 computers, the vulnerable population of the Witty worm was only about 12,000 computers.
Note in the above that the entire population of vulnerable computers was just 12,000, an insignificant number of hosts when you consider how many devices are on the internet.
The Victims:
The vulnerable host population pool for the Witty worm was quite different from that of previous virulent worms. Previous worms have lagged several weeks behind publication of details about the remote-exploit bug, and large portions of the victim populations appeared to not know what software was running on their machines, let alone take steps to make sure that software was up to date with security patches. In contrast, the Witty worm infected a population of hosts that were proactive about security -- they were running firewall software. The Witty worm also started to spread the day after information about the exploit and the software upgrades to fix the bug were available.
O.k., so you have a small pool of vulnerable hosts, and the users at least have the presense of mind to be running a firewall, yet someone took the time to craft and deploy this worm.
Are you sure you still want to claim that there just aren't enough Linux or OSX users out there to make it a tempting target?
That's not even taking psychology into account. There are groups out there who do this kind of thing for fun (and sometimes profit). The bragging rights to having created the first successful OSX worm should be tempting enough if it were as easy a target as MS-Windows apparently is.
I'm a Linux user, and I resemble that remark.
Come to the Dark Side..... We have cookies!
That is funny! I'm not suprised someone created that program. I've seen what new Dells can look like. Yuck.
AmP
LOL. I'm doing a lot better now that I've got spam filtering engaged at my mail host, but I peaked out at 150-200 or so per day before I did that. I've had the same email address for more than 10 years, and my email address is really easy to hit with one of those automated email address generators, so I pretty much got nailed with every spam on the planet.
Pobox.com has great spam filters. They know email, since it's just about all they do.
Then toss out all your anti-virus software, along with the anti-spyware and anti-adware stuff as well.
There is NONE of this on the Mac side.
I've been a Mac user since 1987. I have NEVER been "infected" by ANY kind of virus, worm, trojan, etc. Nor am I bothered by adware or spyware. And during this time, the ONLY "anti-viral" software I used at all was the tiny "Disinfectant INIT" extension that came free from John Norstad (along with running his utilty "Disinfectant" once in a while, but that never found ANYthing unusual).
Since I began using OS X on my newer computer a couple of years back, I no longer run any virus protect at all. NOTHING. It's simply not needed, and a waste of the user's time and money.
I _do_ use a router with NAT (network address translation) enabled, but once set, that is transparent and requires no "followup".
I _do_ have the same problems others have in that tons of spam email is directed towards my mailbox, but I use the shareware utility POPMonitor to preview my email before I download it from my server, and delete all spam before it touches my Mac.
This isn't to say that the Mac OS is "immune" to viruses, et. al. - of course, it's not, and the software is periodically updated by Apple to incorporate additional security features as potential weaknesses in the OS are discovered. But so far, they seem to be doing a good job at it, as my experience is shared by nearly all other Mac OS users.
Tired of viruses? Want a "clean" computer that you simply don't have to worry about any more?
Then, get a Mac!
Cheers! - John
Apparently I'm not as much a defender of MS or PCs as you appear to be anti-MS and anti-PC but I absolutely do not accept your premise that virus builders cannot build self-replicating viruses for hardware and software built by human hands. I may, however, accept that the task may be more difficult on Mac hardware or with Unix software. But then, if you are living on a deserted island by yourself, how often would get chicken pox?
But we're not living on a desert island. We're on the same internet you are on, with the same baddies who want control over our systems for fun and profit. Apparently, it's quite difficult to make a self-propagaing worm/virus for either Macs or Linux systems because they haven't been seen in the wild. There are a lot of different reasons for this, from the fact that neither platform is a monoculture even within its own tier, IOW, if a person is using Linux, you can't rely to the same degree that they are using, say, Evolution for email with the same kind of certainty you can with an MS-Windows user's likelihood of using MS-Outlook.
Also, on the MS-Windows platform, Active-X has been a huge security issue that affects many MS-Windows programs because it runs underneath so many of them.
I wouldn't care so much about the security issues that surround MS-Windows, except that p0wned windows boxes are the source of so much of the spam that clogs our email, and the constant attacks I see on my firewalls from zombies.
Z
We do it because Windows is the Tool of Satan.
Windows problems are a nuisance for Mac users too. Most of the spam and viruses on the internet are being sent from infected PCs. They don't infect Macs, but we still have to delete a bunch of that crap in the e-mail. Also, many Windows users seem to believe that the ultimate purpose of computers is to run anti-virus software, and we're forced to endure endless discussions about it.
I suppose..
But I've been using PC's since Windows 3.1 and have never caught a single virus. All it takes is a few reasonable percautions and you don't have to be a complete geek like me to learn and understand them.
Most virii are so simple to avoid that I always am amazed at how they get spread around so easily - then I remember how stupid some people are...
There are about 22,000,000 of us on this here island... and none of us are vaccinated.
Six years of OS X and still counting... no viruses, adware or spyware.
Bill Gates had a computer that got so fouled up with viruses, even Microsoft's engineers couldn't repair it.
Yes, we DO see how stupid some people are!
Sorry. couldn't resist that, when faced with such meritless smugness.
"i've driven a 1932 Packard for years and never had a problem with the anti-lock brakes!!!" Yeah.
When I was running OS 6 I got a self-replicating virus in an email that qickly used up all my memory, 25M IIRC. I bought Norton and have had it ever since. I was supposed to renew on the 12th of this onth but did not. Should I? (Running 10.4.8)
Windows ME and earlier had problems with multitasking (running more than one program at a time[*]) and so most spyware programs are designed for Windows 2000 and later. That's why you never had any trouble.
Unfortunately, getting a modern PC kills you. I have about six friends with modern PCs and every one of them has some kind of virus/spyware problem. In my experience, it's difficult to impossible to bring a computer with a severe infection back to life.
Most Freepers are relatively computer savvy from what I see "on the ground" with average people. Average people don't know how to use anti-virus/spyware software and turn their computers off at night so it doesn't run automatically. This creates constant virus problems in my experience even when malware softwre is installed and (theoretically) operational.
D
[*] In this context, that means actively running - so if your web browser is loading a page and you click on an email, you're running two programs at once even if you have a bunch of others waiting for input. Windows ME handles the latter situation just fine, the former not so great. The virus/spyware program has to run in the background and so it tends not to be compatible with ME and earlier.
Comes free on most PCs and I remove it for all my friends so their computer can run.
I download two things which work well and don't make trouble.
#1 AVG Free edition &
#2 Zone Alarm
I haven't seen any viruses for years now.
Let me ask you this, though -- is it true that the bad guys can "scan" the net for unprotected computers, or is that just a myth? And isn't it true that they can't actively put stuff on your computer but instead have to sort of passively wait for you take the initiative, like by clicking on an infected email attachment or downloading and MP3 or something? I'm under the impression that as long as you don't go to chintzy websites and try to download stuff, you're safe. Is this true? Or can they reach out and touch you, so to speak.
This depends on your Internet connection.
* If you have dialup access, not much is likely to happen to you since the people who scan for slave computers don't want to bother with sluggards. (This might be another reason you haven't had much trouble).
* If you have broadband access, and you are behind a firewall, you should be OK. Firewall software is normally included with a wireless router such as an Apple AirPort and various LinkSys products. This gives you significantly more security than the raw Windows firewall, and adds wireless access for your laptop.
* If you are directly hooked up to the Internet via a cable modem or DSL, you're in their crosshairs and will get infected within minutes of being hooked up unless your operating system is properly configured.
All of this sounds good. However, bear in mind that the link between "safe" and "dangerous" sites is nebulous. A dangerous site doesn't have to be a porn site.
A good example of a site that most people wouldn't think of as unsafe is myspace.com. This site allows people to put up pretty much anything they want on their profile. While this is great for freedom of expression, the security implications are horrible since many people cut and paste code from other sites to "pimp" their profiles. Some of this code could contain dangerous links or even malicious drive-by downloads.
Because I am creating my own myspace-like site - please visit it at http://www.amazing.com - I have studied this issue with great care. I was going to let people do anything they pleased on the site. And then I saw this:
http://namb.la/popular
(The site owner has a very warped sense of humor don't let the strange domain name scare you.)
If you look at his technical description of what he did, you can see that he went through enormous effort just to do what he must have thought of as a "harmless" prank. Then realize that these spyware applications have real money behind them and you'll get an idea of how dangerous this is.
I think you can see why I surrender and buy a Mac :-). I know it's pricey but it's quality stuff and the security really works.
Hope this was helpful information.
D
Yes, that was *very* helpful. Thanks for 'splainin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.