Version: 2008
  • On CHOW: Sexy vampire party

March 23, 2005 11:51 AM PST

Does IM stand for insecure messaging?

  • 5 comments

(continued from previous page)

looking at the problem, there's the reality that some of these threats could merge with the mobile threats."

Weafer contended that even when IM software makers address new viruses, it will be very hard to get people to update their devices, especially mobile phones.

"It's a social engineering issue," he said. "It's not so difficult to correct software flaws, but it's a monumental task in order to get people to download patches, or even to be aware that they need to get the necessary changes."

On the other hand, viruses that spread through PC-based IM clients might not be able to infect phone-based IM software, Weafer pointed out. In addition, most handset makers download automatic software updates to their models, which means they could protect devices without telling consumers they were doing so.

Neither AOL or Microsoft have made plans to launch marketing campaigns to alert people to IM threats, representatives for the companies said.

The increasing popularity of public IM applications in workplaces has opened corporate networks up to the threat of attacks too. But businesses tend to be less vulnerable targets than consumers, experts said, because most companies already have already installed firewalls and other protective technology. In addition, many companies won't allow employees to download certain files, such as attachments, over public IM networks.

Despite all this, some experts have predicted that a sharp increase in instant messaging virus attacks could cause many businesses that do not use corporate IM systems, or customized software meant just for in-house use, to reconsider whether to let workers install the applications.

According to these industry watchers, the best way to help people protect themselves is to instill the same distrust regarding Web links or attachments sent via IM that they have been taught to apply to e-mail.

"People will need to relearn what they've been told in the past about e-mail, but there are some new things, and it will take time to get the message across," said Shane Coursen, senior technology consultant for antivirus researcher Kaspersky Labs. "Software companies can only do so much to inform their customers. You have to convince them to look at every link or attachment with suspicion."

Previous page
Page 1 | 2 | 3

See more CNET content tagged:
margin, IM threat, IM, MSN Messenger, attack

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (5 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
BlowSearch Offers Secure IM
by March 22, 2005 8:47 AM PST
4,096 bit encryption too. It's called BSM and we use it exclusively for our corporate network for over 50+ employees in our office. We've put it through testing and it's a good product. It also interfaces with AOL,MSN, and Yahoo's messenger products.

In my opinion this article really isn't necessary with products like BlowSearch's BSM Messenger around. Instead of complaining about the issue - offer a solution.
Reply to this comment
Is IM the real problem ?
by March 26, 2005 8:55 PM PST
Q. Does anyone really NEED IM ? I know that, at work, the last thing I wanted was somone messaging me, when I was in the middle of coding - it could cost me hours of work. If people wanted me, they could email & I would read the email, when appropriate.

Perhaps there may be one or two groups of people who NEED IM. But for the remaining 99.9% - it's unnecessary & a security risk. Why take risks with security ?

Hell - most of today's population don't even NEED cell phones, if they could just ORGANISE themselves ;-)
msn
by Scott W March 22, 2005 10:58 AM PST
well, i say that anyone using msn deserves everything they get. sorry i couldn't resist snide jabs at m$
Reply to this comment
Others
by Sboston March 22, 2005 11:44 AM PST
Well you should target yahoo, aim, ICQ, Trillion and others as well. :)
One of the biggest problems here...
by Prndll April 4, 2005 3:11 PM PDT
...is the idea of putting 13 year old children on the internet. The internet is no place for children. There is a reason why ISP's do not sell to 13 year olds. There are too many things out on the net that only represents trouble for children this age. Wether it be viri or pedophiles, extreme porn to getting sued by the RIAA. I do agree that parents need to teach their children about computers. But, just cutting them loose to be exposed to the world like this is nothing short of irresponsible.
Reply to this comment
(5 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement
Click Here

Latest tech news headlines

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Yahoo (0.88%) 0.14 16.07
Microsoft (-0.30%) -0.09 29.54
Time Warner (1.25%) 0.40 32.35
Dow Jones Industrials (1.33%) 136.49 10,406.96
S&P 500 (1.45%) 15.82 1,109.30
NASDAQ (1.38%) 29.97 2,197.85
CNET TECH (0.88%) 14.01 1,601.19
  Symbol Lookup
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right