Re: OT Re: virus warning

[J R FOX jr_fox@xxxxxxxxxx]

--- On Sat, 6/18/11, peregrine@xxxxxxx  wrote:

 It's been perhaps six months since my last crack at this, Jordan, but as I recall these were each
people who allowed kids in the family to play online games. Their e-mail habits were EXTREMELY
conservative, so I suspect one or more online game sites as the source (otherwise innocuous, stupid
kids' games and puzzles). The original injection of the virus looked like it may have been as a
browser helper object, which Spybot will detect if it's installed. After the reinstallations, I set
up guest accounts with restricted rights so they could let the kids play (preferably with
supervision) and not allow any program installations. Unlike Linux and Mac, Microsoft Windows'
default installation has been profoundly and stupidly insecure for as long as I can remember. But
people who know more than I do can MAKE it fairly secure. I think that's part of Redmond's Plan for
World Domination: create a flawed system requiring certified techs to fix it, charge the techs
 for training and certification, laugh all the way to the bank. Am I paranoid?

 Jeff

----------------------------------------------------------------

When you fill in these missing details, it all suddenly starts
to make sense. This is readily avoidable, and not something
that everyone is apt to run into. Kids left to do whatever
online is a great way to open the door to trouble. Browser
helper objects represent another risk factor. (I say that
even though I have about 15 "add-ons" to FireFox that I like
. . . though I investigated each of them before installation.
But I did pass on the Google and the ASK toolbars -- numerous
times -- over concern that they had some commercial spyware
aspects to them.)

Besides the OS-lockdown you mentioned, there are other
approaches one could use. You can mount a static, virtual
OS image, each time, then blow it away at the end of session.
Nothing is going to get you in that scenario.
Or you can have plug-in, plug-out drive trays, with one of
them being designated an "at risk" Windows, where if something
happens to it, it's no big deal. The latter can also be a more
viable way to run multiple OSes, as opposed to trying to cram
them onto one drive with some boot mediator like Acronis
Selector. I know someone who has had several systems going
that way for many years, and have long intended to try it
myself.

Regarding updates and patches, avoiding them entirely is not
very practical. You'd have to stay off the internet, and
not allow any contact with portable hard drives, thumb drives,
or discs that you don't know for sure where they've been.
And there have been an increasing number of apps over the
last 6 - 8 years that require some major update -- the various
Net Framework releases being the leading example -- or else
they can not run.

Lest anyone imagine that 'Nix is totally safe, the more of
a user base they accumulate, the more hackers will find this
platform to be a target worth their time. From what I'm
hearing, this may already have started to happen.


 Jordan