Comments on: Customers squeezed, as ISPs close in on viruses

Broadband providers turn up the heat on customers, as the spread of spam viruses such as Bagel reignites the debate over just who should be in charge of Internet security.

[TV James]

ISPs should knock users offline

I'm a Verizon DSL subscriber and I'm kind of disappointed that Verizon won't take people offline (or quarantine them) if they are infected and spewing spam all over the internet.

Every morning when I sign in to my work account, I have 10-20 pieces of spam in my inbox and almost none trickles in while I'm working -- it's obviously home users who don't have virus protection on their computers.

The ISPs should start selling virus protection software and actively putting accounts on hold when the computer on their network is infected and attempting to affect other computers, just like any corporate network would.

[keharson]

granny

Per cnet"nowadays,a person sending spam,is granny,and she has no idea she's doing it"Looks to me to me like this would have been an ideal place to have given an example(s) of granny's mistake.

[thenet411]

Its about time!

Even though it is easy for those of us that are employed in the tech sector to say, it is still very true that people should do their part to keep these virus writers and spammers at bay. I mean, do people buy a car and not put gas in it or have the oil changed? Of course not. I have believed for a long time that if people refuse to learn about their computers and not take steps to make sure their computers are secure (how difficult is it really to click on Tools>Windows Update and update your computer? How difficult is it to do the same with their anti-virus software? There are even automated ways to do this! Sheesh!), they should not be allowed to be connected to other computers. If my car was a rusting heap that was spilling gasoline, oil, or antifreeze all over the road, my car would be pulled over and taken off the road until it was fixed! If you think about it, these ignorant computer users are essentially doing the same thing an ignorant driver does when they spill their car's fluids all over the road. They are making a mess of the road and making it dangerous for others to use the road.

Bottom line is, too many people just don't get it. So, kick'em offline until they do!

[philnye]

What about subsidizing anti-virus?

One of the big problems I see with helping subscribers to close their computers to hackers and e-mail spoofing is to subsidize the cost of really good anti-virus software. I am not the standard consumer as I have 3 computers running at home but I must admit I get a little lax about upgrading my anti-virus software anually as 3 user licenses costs me around $80 for the latest and greatest software version or just $60 to maintain present version and continue to download virus updates. Quite a racket if you ask me. I know there are free scanners out there but they don't perform as well nor do they offer active scanning.

Just my $0.02.
Phil Kosarek
MI

[darbrown]

Subsidizing free anti-virus software

What would be the advantages/benefits to a company subsidizing free distribution of anti-virus software to home users? Just curious where you're coming from.

[Maelstorm]

This needed to happen along time ago

Unfortunatly, the problem has become so widespread that it will be difficult to get it under control. The ISP is just providing network acces. That's it. The onus for security is on the end user. I have read the Comcast AUP and it specifically states that the user is responsible for security of their own computers...which is how it should be. If you cause a problem on the network, then your connection should be pulled until the problem is fixed.

It's called taking responsibility. The problem is that computers have become so easy to use that even people who are not computer litterate can use them. These are the people who the virus writers target because these are the non-technical people who really don't know any better. But, on the flip side of the coin, how many times have we said "Don't open attachments that you are not expecting."? These people should know better than to open anything in outlook/outlook express, but they keep doing it, which is why worms like MyDoom, SoBig, and NetSky are running amock. If you don't open the attachment, then the virus won't spread.

[John Kuzak]

outlook/outlook express

http://www.analogstereo.com/peugeot_607_owners_manual.htm

[gglawits]

Recently, Earthlink blocked outgoing port 25 (SMTP)...

...for all users, because some spammers also were operating from Earthlink accounts (D'oh!).

That denies me the right to send out email as,
say, [e-mail] (or whatever domain name I have pointing to my static IP Earthlink DSL line).

I have not given notice to Earthlink yet, but have already signed up with another ISP, and once the DSL line has been switched over, I'll give Earthlink the boot.

They really chose the dumbest way of doing it - even AOL's policy of allowing only a limited number of emails per day is better (would have worked for me). Or selectively cutting off customers who flood the internet with spam (I wouldn't have a problem with that either).

I'm still fuming - I'm just looking forward to sending the final "You're fired!" email to Earthlink in a few days.

-Greg

[CMatrix]

Help out ISPs with VirusCop

We had such a bad problem with e-mail borne viri/worms clogging our inboxes that we developed VirusCop. This is a free utility that helps you uncover where the virus spam is coming from and notify the appropriate administrators. As a result we've seen a large reduction in virus spam. Its not perfect though, a tiny number of ISPs (like tpnet.pl) don't seem to care what is going on in their networks.

viruscop.org