Can malware be beaten?

[PeterCH]

Oh please you love trolling any thread with any regard to running down Microsoft Windows. If Windows was as bad as some many people make it out to be; it would not be as popular.

It is cheaper, easier to get (ubiquitous) and most people don't know better or are forced to use it by co-dependencies.

 

[Linouser]

It is cheaper, easier to get (ubiquitous) and most people don't know better or are forced to use it by co-dependencies.

+- R1800 is much cheaper than downloading a "free" Linux distro

The only person I know who runs down Windows 7 while admitting to never actually using it.

There is no perfect OS anyone who claims otherwise is ignorant and knows nothing of what they are talking about. If you know what you talking about I'll agree but until then, its not worth it. As I have better things with my time than to run down an OS.

 

[PeterCH]

+- R1800 is much cheaper than downloading a "free" Linux distro

An OS which comes with the system (OEM) is free and is pre-configured.
Most people buy their computers with their OS and that's really how MS got to be so big, they forced OEMs to bundle Windows with their PCs - the same for small mom and pop shops. Contrast that with - find something such as Linux exists, find the right drivers and hardware combo for it, find the right applications for it OR have them written ... etc - all great costs, in contrast.

The only person I know who runs down Windows 7 while admitting to never actually using it.

Who? Not speaking about me? I've tried it and it sucks. It's slow and it still virus prone.

There is no perfect OS anyone who claims otherwise is ignorant and knows nothing of what they are talking about. If you know what you talking about I'll agree but until then, its not worth it. As I have better things with my time than to run down an OS.

Of course there is no perfect OS but some OS'es are more secure, that's why the experts recommend not using Windows (even Windows 7) to do your internet banking for instance. Windows was originally a single user OS with network capability bolted on as an after thought while Unix based OS'es were secure from the beginning. Maybe not ABSOLUTELY secure but definitely much harder for malware to compromise.

 

[rurapente]

WTH? Windows 7 is slow? Its knocks the socks of Vista on boot and response times and usability, and application performance. Its kernel is by far more robust. I know of application developers already switching to it for performance gains.

that's why the experts recommend not using Windows (even Windows 7) to do your internet banking for instance.

if u knew what work i do, you would know why I'm finding that comment highly amusing. lol

 

[PeterCH]

WTH? Windows 7 is slow? Its knocks the socks of Vista on boot and response times and usability, and application performance. Its kernel is by far more robust. I know of application developers already switching to it for performance gains.

I use XP. In fact I used 7 on a faster system than my current XP one and XP still feels faster - 2.5GHz C2D vs 1.6GHz C2D ULV.

if u knew what work i do, you would know why I'm finding that comment highly amusing. lol

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/10/avoid_windows_malware_bank_on.html

That's just one of many.....

I'm not in IT but have been using computers since 1991.

 

[rurapente]

its much over muchness. some people drive a car fine, others smash through an intersection killing a few cause they were texting. the user is more dangerous than the OS

 

[PeterCH]

its much over muchness. some people drive a car fine, others smash through an intersection killing a few cause they were texting. the user is more dangerous than the OS

Sure but some infections came automatically on Windows - you know previewing email in OutLook got you infected, double clicking on JPEGs got you infected because Windows turned off extensions by default and someone could email you an .EXE with the JPEG icon inside it and you'd think you were viewing a picture but instead you were running an trojan....

I agree users are important but the OS should be as secure as it can be .

 

[apogeeza]

Heh. While slightly less prone, Linux is relatively overlooked at this stage since most users run Windows, in particular every-day, transactional people in the street. Switch them all over to Linux and I"m pretty confident Malware for it will be available soon thereafter. Supply vs Demand

Oh, sure, no doubt. But the difference is that MS relies on others to apply "fixes" to it's bad code - anti-X [virus, malware etc] is a multi-billion dollar industry. If you're lucky MS might release a patch to fix it's own screw-up in their OS.

Linux on the other hand, when a vulnerability is found, it's patched in the OS itself, sometimes within hours, with more eyes on the problem - more fixes will be available, simple crowd-sourcing at work, also saving you money on unnecessary and sometimes expensive 3rd party apps.

 

[apogeeza]

An OS which comes with the system (OEM) is free and is pre-configured.

No it isn't. I can show you the Dell statement proving I had to pay for Vista after I specifically stated "No VISTA!!!" and they will not permit a roll-back to XP - neither in the licence agreement, nor in the BIOS.

WARNING: Dell have hard-coded the BIOS to deny the installation of any version of XP.

Thank God my warranty has expired:
- since Vista can't run the apps I need (and BSOD when I try "upgrade" to SP2 that offers a ray of hope), and
- Dell does not permit me to install the OS that does
- I solved the problem by installing Kubuntu.

hehehehe

 

[Kloofvreter]

Funny you don't get malware on Mac OSX, Linux or Solaris, it's only Windows. And before you start screaming about security through obscurity - Mac OS 9 had over 80 viruses and its marketshare was much less than the 5% of Mac OSX. (Yes you'll find a trojan or two for those OS'es, but no worms or viruses or rootkits).

White list all software and prevent running of other software I guess.
Have the OS in ROM?
Run all apps in low privilege?

Oh please. We've all been through this millions of times. THe moment that your precious OS becomes the market leader, you will see the virus writers shift their target.

 

[PeterCH]

Oh please. We've all been through this millions of times. THe moment that your precious OS becomes the market leader, you will see the virus writers shift their target.

Nonsense, Mac OS 9 had viruses for it. Fact is that its very difficult to write viruses for OSX (and Linux). It's very easy to do so for Windows.

People who cite 'security through obscurity' are just deluding themselves.

 

[Kloofvreter]

Nonsense, Mac OS 9 had viruses for it. Fact is that its very difficult to write viruses for OSX (and Linux). It's very easy to do so for Windows.

People who cite 'security through obscurity' are just deluding themselves.

So if this world is ever dominated by Linux or OSX, we won't really see viruses or malware?

 

[The_Unbeliever]

WARNING: Dell have hard-coded the BIOS to deny the installation of any version of XP.

Thank God my warranty has expired:
- since Vista can't run the apps I need (and BSOD when I try "upgrade" to SP2 that offers a ray of hope), and
- Dell does not permit me to install the OS that does
- I solved the problem by installing Kubuntu.

hehehehe

hehehehe

 

[PeterCH]

So if this world is ever dominated by Linux or OSX, we won't really see viruses or malware?

You may see some trojans but you'd see very few viruses and none of these zombie botnets which host spam, phishing sitez and banner adz.

 

[rurapente]

my word the ignorance is deafening.

I got this off a website from Google:

We are a minority in a world dominated by Windows (93% of the installed base worldwide, according to HitsLink Market Share statistics for August 2009) and IE (67%).

Mac users belong to the largest OS minority at 4.9% (5.3% if we include iPhone and iPod touch users, as both run a version of OS X), followed by Linux at 0.94%. Firefox is the most popular non-Microsoft browser at 23%, followed by Safari at 4.1%. Google's up-and-coming Chrome browser has achieved 2.8% market share, and perennial underdog Opera is just over 2.0%.*

Now think, logically - its not really not difficult. If Mr Baddy wants to write malware, spyware and other things to steal data, and cause problems, is his best target platform Mac at 4.9%?? OR Linux 0.94%? ermm no, its the Windows at 93% hence the majority of focus, and ergo the large number of malware and virus/spyware products being produced for the windows platform.

(and we are talking enduser desktops, not servers)

Any idiot who thinks Linux is 100% secure out the box simply because its Linux is going to fare badly in the future when market share swings towards the latter...

 

[PeterCH]

my word the ignorance is deafening.

I got this off a website from Google:


Now think, logically - its not really not difficult. If Mr Baddy wants to write malware, spyware and other things to steal data, and cause problems, is his best target platform Mac at 4.9%?? OR Linux 0.94%? ermm no, its the Windows at 93% hence the majority of focus, and ergo the large number of malware and virus/spyware products being produced for the windows platform.

(and we are talking enduser desktops, not servers)

Any idiot who thinks Linux is 100% secure out the box simply because its Linux is going to fare badly in the future when market share swings towards the latter...

Right so by using the same logic, please explain why Mac OS 9 had VIRUSES while OSX does not?

5% of personal computers are Apple Macs. Usually Macs are more expensive, this translates that Macs are owned by more affluent people - do you not think that Mac users who are wealthier do not bank online or use their credit cards to buy stuff - and those accounts are not maybe bigger than those of less affluent people? Mac users don't run AV scanners either and most believe that viruses can't touch them.

Surely a few virus writers would write a few viruses where the payoff is that big? How many viruses exist for Windows again?

To me the explanation is that, OSX like Linux is more secure and writing viruses is a far more difficult experience. Maybe OSX is not entirely virus secure - no system is - but its designed to be secure from the beginning - like Linux and Solaris.

http://anti-trend.homelinux.org/literature/novell_windows_insecurity_whitepaper.pdf

 

[The_Unbeliever]

I used OS/2 a long while ago.

It also is vulnerable to certain DOS viruses. (Exebug = goodbye OS/2 partition...)

Linux is also vulnerable to viruses - but this will only affect your userspace, and not the rest of the system. But Linux viruses is scarce like unicorns.

Windows7 is also vulnerable - and the much-hyped UAC is no safeguard as some trojans is able to infect crucial system files even though UAC was enabled.

Also, from The Register comes a most disturbing article : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/09/malware_child_abuse_images_frame_up/

Innocent people have been branded as child abusers after malware infected their PCs, an AP investigation has discovered.

Technically sophisticated abusers sometimes store images of child abuse on PCs infected by Trojans that grant them illicit access to compromised machines.

The plight of those framed in this way is all the worse because paedophiles commonly use supposed malware infections of their PCs to explain the presence of images of child abuse. Because of this the "Trojan did it" defence is understandably met with scepticism from law enforcement professionals.

Michael Fiola, a former Massachusetts government worker, was arrested two years ago after child abuse images were discovered on his state-issued laptop computer after officials became suspicious of huge data use bills associated with the machine and began an investigation. He was eventually cleared nearly 11 months later after defence experts were able to show that the laptop harboured malware programmed to visit as many as 40 child porn sites per minute, far faster than a human surfer would be able to accomplish.

 

[Telkomisaloser]

Beating malware is simple. Get rid of Lusers.

Fixed....

 

[PeterCH]

Microsoft sold those millions of users defective systems that were ill equipped to be connected to a public network, yet it advertised them as being the ideal way to use the web and get email. Why haven’t those users filed a class action suit over being sold a harmful, defective product that was unfit for the purpose it was sold?

Thanks to its extensive use of battle-hardened Unix and open source software, Mac OS X also has always had security precautions in place that Windows lacked. It has also not shared the architectural weaknesses of Windows that have made that platform so easy to exploit and so difficult to clean up afterward, including:

* the Windows Registry and the convoluted software installation mess related to it,
* the Windows NT/2000/XP Interactive Services flaw opening up shatter attacks,
* a wide open, legacy network architecture that left unnecessary, unsecured ports exposed by default,
* poorly designed network sharing protocols that failed to account for adequate security measures,
* poorly designed administrative messaging protocols that failed to account for adequate security,
* poorly designed email clients that gave untrusted scripts access to spam one’s own contacts unwittingly,
* an integrated web browser architecture that opened untrusted executables by design, and many others.

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/...-apple-wont-inherit-microsofts-malware-crown/

Windows 7 inherently insecure says researcher
http://news.techworld.com/security/115456/windows-7-inherently-insecure-says-researcher/

 

[PeterCH]

Fixed....

That's right! How dare these clowns expect to use this internet and email without obtaining an IT degree first or having a son/grandson in IT on constant standby?

Lusers!!! Only too true.