1/3 Of Americans Think Viruses Won't Strike Them

Discussion in 'other security issues & news' started by Notok, Oct 4, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Notok

    Notok Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    Portland, OR (USA)
    http://www.techweb.com/wire/security/49400161
     
  2. Bulletproof

    Bulletproof Guest

    Given that various polls here, show that a fairly large number of Wilders members claim that they have "impenetrable" fortress , I would say 1/3 of Americans thinking that viruses won't strike them is reasonable.
     
  3. big ed

    big ed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Posts:
    3,137
    Location:
    Ye Olde New England
    1/3 also probably think that Wyoming is on the East Coast! Polls are very entertaining. As Yakov Smirnoff used to say, "watta country".

    big ed
     
  4. k0nsl

    k0nsl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Posts:
    13
    And not to mention <snip>



    edited to remove nation-bashing - Detox
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 4, 2004
  5. Marja

    Marja Honestly, I'm not a bot!!

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Posts:
    4,553
    Location:
    In the Vast Fields of My Mind
    Of course, that says nothing about the other TWO-THIRDS!! You can take a polls all day long, asking loaded questions, dropping answers you don't want,etc. Polls are entertainment, I wouldn't base my life or my outlook on any of them, find out the facts yourself!


    Marja:cool:
     
  6. Detox

    Detox Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    8,507
    Location:
    Texas, USA
    That's enough of the broad, generalized bashing of peoples and/or their nations. No matter what nation or people may be the subject of conversation, this is not a board for such behavior.
     
  7. steverio

    steverio Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    161
    I'm with you Marja...and I prefer to do the research myself for all matters in life before I believe them. :)
     
  8. slammer_JvA

    slammer_JvA Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Posts:
    1,588
    Location:
    Below sea-level. Safe and sound behind our dikes:
    My apologies for accidently starting a bashing here. That wasn't my intention at all. I am a little teaser sometimes; like to be on the edge with my comments, but want everybody to know that I don't mean bad.
    Just like to give some eye-openers now and then, mostly in an ironical way -with, I hope, true sense of self-criticism as well.
    The limited boundries of the written word I regretfully sometimes forget, while in the process.
    Again, my apologies for the ones I might have offended.

    I hereby removed my previous post.
    Live long, prosper and peacefully.

    regards,
    slammer
     
  9. dvk01

    dvk01 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    3,131
    Location:
    Loughton, Essex. UK
    Judging by the amount of help requests we get on this and other forums I would say that the one third estimate is rather on the low side and that applies to all nations and computer users generally
     
  10. Rita

    Rita Infrequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Posts:
    6,863
    Location:
    wilds of wv
    i used to not even think about virus'es and worms--didnt even know any better but that has changed since i've been educated about them.Luckily when i didnt know i was never infected,a miracle i guess.maybe there are some people out there that- like i used to be,just dont think about it--hopefull they too will learn before it's to late--that is my hope
    rita
     
  11. Sweetie(*)(*)

    Sweetie(*)(*) Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Posts:
    419
    Location:
    Venus
    the reality is there probably already infected, doesn't matter where ur from.
    australia is the same.
     
  12. Lurkerella

    Lurkerella Guest

    When they talk about the staggering numbers of zombie machines, it is a wonder how anything is still running. Or maybe we just think they are?

    Time will tell, in the meantime, those who know, teach - those who don't, myself included, learn and spread the word. That is our mission, now.
     
  13. k0nsl

    k0nsl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Posts:
    13
    Okay, sorry. Should not happen again, I hope.
     
  14. nod32_9

    nod32_9 Guest

    Most people think that they are good drivers with only 3 years of driving. The same with net surfers. They're only too happy to download a program or open that link/attachment. Education will help, but it isn't the cure, because the world is full of curious and stupid people. Why do we have spams? Because they work!

    You don't invite everyone into your house. Yet you would download stuffs without questioning their origin. If you don't know, then ask for help. If more people would use common sense, then the net would be a much safer place.

    Use a free antivirus and firewall if you cannot afford paid versions. Avoid porns and file-sharing applications.

    On the other end of the spectrum, we have the Paranoids. They have multi-layered defense to sniff out 98% of baddies. There are no perfect defense. Make sure you have a good image file to restore from in case of a disaster. Keep the image file on removable media.
     
  15. Notok

    Notok Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    Portland, OR (USA)
    I like that analogy, I'll have to remember that.

    I doubt there will ever be a "cure", but if enough people learn what they CAN do, and where the problems lie, then they can make the right kinds of demands to the right kinds of people to get the problem stemmed. How many problems could be avoided just by hardening thier OS? I absolutely agree with you, though, in that no amount of 'safe practices' would stop attacks like download.ject and other attacks, and it doesn't suffice to just say "don't use IE." Ultimately developers need to develop better strategies for reacting to vulnerabilities that are found.


    Or better yet, find some of the deals for free year of a paid AV like Panda or EZ Armor, and/or use some other free apps that can block what some of these AVs may miss.. a little education can save you some big money, one way or another.

    It's all about damage control. You can't just label someone as 'paranoid' just because they run a lot of security software unless you know the person and their reasons for doing so. Everyone has their reasons for running the amount that they do. For myself it has a lot to do with having the knowledge of the products available so that when I'm called on for help, I can put together a good defense based on the individual level of skill, resources, finances, and need. Besides that I also enjoy playing with the software, making it all work together nicely, and learning how to troubleshoot problems if/when they arise, just like any other kind of software. Does that make me paranoid? I can also think of half a dozen other scenarios where a free AV and firewall wouldn't suffice, especially in multi-user environments where another user (espeically a child) can't be completely trusted to maintain the integrity of the system.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2004
  16. slammer_JvA

    slammer_JvA Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Posts:
    1,588
    Location:
    Below sea-level. Safe and sound behind our dikes:
    Good post, Notok. :)
     
  17. nod32_9

    nod32_9 Guest

    I don't do risky business. Therefore, my health insurance premium is much lower than a race car driver. The same can be said about PC security. You're asking for trouble if you give a child complete control of your PC. We have libraries for kids who could not live with the restrictions.

    Parents are brainwashed into believing that they must keep up with the latest electronic gadgets like cell phone, MP3, PC, and video game.
     
  18. Notok

    Notok Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    Portland, OR (USA)
    Some don't have that luxury, some have a legitimate need to keep sensitive data on their computer. The point is that more people need to take security seriously and develop their own strategy according to their own needs and wants, while understanding that there's no such thing as 100% protection. Getting infected may mean nothing more than having to re-image the drive to YOU, but an accountant (for example) may face a whole lot more if he suddenly finds out s/he has had a RAT or keylogger for the past few months. The simple fact is that there is no one setup that will suffice for every situation. What the poll illustrates is that there are still too many people that think "it won't happen to me." I would bet that too many of those people polled have absolute confidence in a very minimalistic approach, such as using a free AV, firewall, and what they consider common sense.
     
  19. nod32_9

    nod32_9 Guest

    True, but these baddies don't come preloaded with windows. What are the odds of picking up a keylogger program at Amazon, Ebay, or Yahoo Finance? Most infections occur because people allow these programs execute via emails, illegal downloads, and infected trialware/freeware.

    Most bugs don't have the ability to sneak past a properly configured firewall and up-to-date antivirus program, free or paid.
     
  20. Notok

    Notok Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    Portland, OR (USA)
    http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/download.ject.c.html

    Think we won't see more of these? How about exploits of the GDI vulnerability?

    You have still yet to really address the main subject. Care to organize your thoughts and present a clear point of view, or is your view just that s**t happens because people are stupid?

    --

    ...requires education.
     
  21. google guy

    google guy Guest

    Based on posts and reading the comments of members on this board, Methinks it's rather some of our least experienced wilders members (even some of our 500+post members) who need to learn this lesson (there is no 100% protection that is). Despite running NOD, Processguard,TDS-3, Looknstop, etc ....

    You say that but yet....

    And who are to say that their judgement of the situation is incorrect? After all you already said that there is no one setup that suffices for all, and people should "develop their own strategy according to their own needs and wants".

    The implication in your last sentence though seems to directly contradict this and seem to imply that everyone who uses a minimistic approach is wrong or at least overconfident.

    As far as I see, regardless of your precautions whether you are "paranoid", or take a minimistic approach, thinking that you have a unbreechable digital fortress is a big mistake.
     
  22. Notok

    Notok Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    Portland, OR (USA)
    There are several scenarios where a free AV & firewall are all a person needs, I'm not contending that. What I am contending is the idea that it's all anyone really needs. It's just like any other product that a consumer would buy, they need to know what/why different products exist and what those products can do for them. Just as it doesn't suffice to say "don't use IE" (although I generally agree with this statement), it's not suffice to say "don't ever put sensitive information on your computer" or "don't let your child use your computer", as there ARE legitimate/unavoidable circumstances that can require these things. Like I say, while cleaning out an infection may be no big deal to one person, could potentially be a much bigger deal for someone else. It's just not a black and white issue.

    And to clarify my stance on the statements you have quoted, I was saying that I think there are too may people out there that download a free AV and firewall and then believe that they are 100% protected. I don't believe the statements I made were out of context with that conviction whatsoever.

    Edit: If you want to turn this into a "but you said..." contest, you can count me out. My last post was only an attempt to draw eludication from nod, not to try to peg him on contradictions. So far the overall argument has only really included unncessary labeling and oversimplification that doesn't make his stance very clear. Although I admit the last post was a little curt, I think I've shown my willingness to hold a reasonable discussion on the matter.. that's just not possible if the other party isn't willing to put some time and thought into what's being said.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2004
  23. Googleguy

    Googleguy Guest

    As far as I can see, all Nod is saying is that in his case, a minimistic approach is sufficient because he does not carry out risky behaviour and you jumped all over him. Perhaps he offended you by talking about "Paranoids"?

    As for the "he said" game, looks to me you already started the game .....
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.