Comments on: Study: Unpatched PCs compromised in 20 minutes
The average "survival time" is not even long enough to download patches that would protect a computer from Net threats.
The average "survival time" is not even long enough to download patches that would protect a computer from Net threats.
November 25, 2009 3:51 PM PST
November 25, 2009 3:35 PM PST
November 25, 2009 3:09 PM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
You can pile on the latest anti-viral and firewall software on your PC, shut down file-sharing and all the other useless services crammed into windows, but all it takes is one stupid move such as openning an infected attachment - and it's game over.
With over 50 million lines of code in Windows, you can bet that there are a lot of day-zero exploits just waiting to happen.
I don't know which is worse - the bugs we don't know in Windows (because nobody has seen the source code), or the fact that a smart hacker could find a hole in open-source Linux. Hey, it's a tight OS, but I'm sure there are holes in that OS too.
Windows (because nobody has seen the source code), or the fact
that a smart hacker could find a hole in open-source Linux. Hey,
it's a tight OS, but I'm sure there are holes in that OS too."
Pretty obvious, I can see the code in OSS, so I have a better
chance of protecting myself. Imagine you are going to a foreign
country that is know for certain sicknesses, you know in advance
so you get certain inoculations before you go. The point being
that yes no one OS is perfect but if you can see everything then
you might have a better chance of survival. Using MS is like
putting all your eggs in one basket and letting your 2 year old
carry it home.
Then c|net could write about that.
Oh wait... a story that might put Apple in a positive light? I
forgot this was c|net! Never mind!
Not one word about the real root of the problem...MS
If the human body had to depend on MS to insure birth I certainly wish Bill G. would be the first nural implant.
For years the world has seen a steady increase in attack vectors and still the only answer to all that is symptom fighting. The blaming finger has been pointed to almost anyone and anything: users, administrators, managers, third-party software, developers, vendors, hackers, crackers and even politicians.
Is there any end in sight?
Realisticly speaking no. As long as plenty of people are willing to jump through hoops and see improvement in that then that's exacly the kind of customer demand that will be satisfied. Hey, it keeps the stock holders happy so why change the game plan?
In the mean time alternatives are getting spin doctered because they are not part of the business plan. But then who would expect Ford to recommend BMWs? Or even a Ford driver to admit that he would rather like to drive a BMW but is afraid of having to handle gears?
Lucky enough for us the alternatives are getting harder and harder to ignore though. Also because other stock holders (and tax payers) would like to improve their bottom line.
That's why I keep a copy of ZoneAlarm/etc handy in a CD.
by the way - I've seen machines infected in as quick as 5 minutes. At the height of a worm's outbreak, this may fell down further to even seconds.
Thanks,
Harry
Critical updates are NOT the first line of defense. That's part of the stratigic package.
The tactical key, we've found, is utilizing a dedicated firewall without exception. While software firewalls can be effective for single users, they simply can't be installed and configured fast enough at the onset to afford the necessary protection. Plus, they slow down even fast machines to the point of making it frustrating for the user.
Further, as has been pointed out, it takes only moments for an 'online' install to become virus infected and/or malware infested - how very true!
Our firewalls? Stripped down Linux and IPChains/IPTables, of course, with some logging and Intrusion Detection. Installed on an older Dell PII-350, for instance, net surfing speed is restored and protection is maximized because of dedicated fast throughput (100BaseT on both the protected and unprotected ports).
The only better protection method is the power switch and a yellow notepad.
on the net. Why doesn' t Joe Public catch on
Linux,Unix,BeOS,just about any thing but Windows is
immune hear me, IMMUNE to all Windows viruses.
Linux is not immune to worms or viruses....it's simply a matter of time. Hackers, crackers, worm writers, (and whomever else) are only interested in maximizing their effect. Now tell me, whats the best way to do that. To write a worm that attacks less than 5% of computers connected to the Internet, or a worm that has the potential to infect up to 90% of computers connected to the Internet? --Hm....let me think...
So your statement that Linux and Unix are immune seems rather assinine and naive to me. And lets not forget that there are just not enough applications that run on Linux (at this point) to make it a feasible OS for everyday use by the average person.
wouldn't be compramised at all(the patches wouldn't
work either).
- An older article...but it's coming...
- by August 18, 2004 12:21 PM PDT
- update Six vulnerabilities in a common code that handles an open-source image format could allow intruders to compromise computers running Linux and may allow attacks against Windows PCs as well as Macs running OS X.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- already fixed for some
- by arthur-b August 20, 2004 2:35 PM PDT
- Example: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vulnerabilities.html#mozilla1.7.2
- Like this
-
(34 Comments)The security issues appear in a library supporting the portable network graphics (PNG) format, used widely by programs such as the Mozilla and Opera browsers and various e-mail clients. The most critical issue, a memory problem known as a buffer overflow, could allow specially created PNG graphics to execute a malicious program when the application loads the image.
And...
The most critical vulnerability crashed two open-source browsers, Evans said. "A scarier possibility is targeted exploitation by e-mailing a nasty PNG to someone who uses a graphical e-mail client to decode" images, he added.
Link to article
http://news.com.com/Image+flaw+pierces+PC+security/2100-1002_3-5298999.html?tag=cd.hed
And IE? Has that been fixed already? Or do you have to wait 200+ days again?