Who is responsible ? The users, The ISPs or the vendors

Discussion in 'other security issues & news' started by danielle22, Oct 23, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. danielle22

    danielle22 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    Posts:
    1
    Hi all,


    i have a securtiy debate at uni and i need some points for it... pls help.....

    topic is

    If you don't secure your system, you are as responsible as the person committing the intrusion.

    please tell me something for and against the topic.
    Thnx loads in advance
     
  2. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    I think that every involved company/person is responsible.
    ISP's can remove as many spam-emails and viruses as possible.
    A vendor of email-software, should put a striking banner on his email-software, which warns every (new) user against spam + educating links regarding spam.
    There are so many examples of what companies and people can do, IF they want to, which is usually the problem.
     
  3. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    I usually see PBKAC (Problem Between Keyboard and Chair). For example, people not keeping their AV up-to-date or even using one, clicking every link/banner they see, downloading any which file they like, etc.

    Some ISPs offer security software for theur users but its still the users who have to keep it working. Also no program can stop a person from downloading malware or clicking something if thats what they really want to do.
     
  4. steve161

    steve161 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Posts:
    681
    Location:
    New York
    More people need to learn that not securing one's computer may impact other users.. But if they do not care about their own system, they are not going to care about others. Still, the question is about apportioning blame. If I leave my keys in the ignition of an unlocked car and it stolen, I think that the person who stole it deserves the brunt of the blame. It's a stupidity vs. criminality equation.
     
  5. MikeBCda

    MikeBCda Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Posts:
    1,627
    Location:
    southern Ont. Canada
    No question, you wouldn't be charged for the "offense" nearly anywhere. But you would almost certainly see greatly reduced compensation from insurance or whatever, since they would see you as having made the crime easier, even "inviting" it. Plus you could very well see greatly reduced penalties for the actual criminal, for the same reason.

    It's similar to the "attractive nuisance" principle. If you have a swimming pool that's fenced but uncovered at night, and someone climbs the fence and then drowns in the pool, you will be held partly liable even though the other person was obviously trespassing.
     
  6. TairikuOkami

    TairikuOkami Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    2,509
    Location:
    Slovakia
    It is quite simple: Ignorance/or ot knowing about of the law does not excuse.
    PC is a powerfull weapon and its owner has to take responsibility for its actions.
     
  7. steve161

    steve161 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Posts:
    681
    Location:
    New York
    I have to respectfully disagree with your reasoning here. Committing an intentional crime based on how easy or inviting it may be is usually not considered a mitigating circumstance. Intentionally hacking a person's computer is criminal, whether it was easy or not does not matter. And as far as I know, the attractive nuisance principle is usually applied when a minor is injured, not when an adult possesses the intention to trespass.
     
  8. Eh_Greg

    Eh_Greg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2007
    Posts:
    64
    Location:
    US.
    One thing that some companies like Verizon do is let you download free FW,AV., Antispyware . One thing I don't do, is use it. :D There is just so much better. Alot of things better than what comes from Verizon and/or microsoft as far as security for teh windows OS.
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2007
  9. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    Hi,

    Dutch consumer interest protection institute did a small research (they are experienced market researchers, so I'll think it is a statistical relevant probe).

    Out of sample of people (1000 interviews) who recently bought a PC. After 3 months they did a small telephonic questionaire, 25 percent did not the difference between an Antivirus and Firewall. Within this groupe they selected randomly a smaller sample of 100.
    - 30% thought they had an active Antispyware program, but could not find (even with the guided help of the interviewer)
    - 25% was infected with Antispyware, when scanning their PC with an on line webbased tool
    - 10% was infected with a virus, after on-line scan
    - 3% turned out to be a bot

    Reason enough for this institute to claim that with every PC sold, a minimum setup of security software should be added by the vendors or the Internet Service providers. Vendors told that this would increase prices, government that it would increase administratitive costs. So journalists think is has no change, only good for starting the discussion of who is responsible.

    Interesting in this development is what is Google going to do with Bufferzone?

    Regards Kees
     
  10. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Not Bufferzone :)
    Google bought Greenborder.
     
  11. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    Lucas1985,

    You are right :thumb:

    Regards
     
  12. Tarq57

    Tarq57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Posts:
    966
    Location:
    Wellington NZ
    Interesting proposition.
    Are you going to debate for or against?
    From a morality perspective, a reality (pragmatic) perspective, or legal?
    Or are you in the fortunate position of being able to choose?
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.