Just a general comment:
Windows 7 users have a lower malware infection rate than XP users - mainly
because, now, more malware is spread by social engineering than by frontal
attacks and Windows 7 makes social engineering more difficult. Microsoft /
AMD / Intel have closed many of the vectors of attack malware writers used
to depend on, so they rely more on social engineering now - i.e. tricking
users to run their stuff.
Computer infection is it still is a serious issue - more so even - as
"organized" crime has gotten involved. But I'm not one for legislation /
which means more taxes / then police / which means even more taxes / etc.
etc. ... all of which disagrees with me.
Instead, IMHO, the best way to fight this stuff (other than through hardware
/ software improvements), is simply to make sure people are aware of and
informed as to why it is important to keep one's computer(s) uninfected and
how to go about it no matter what operating system they are running. An
ounce of prevention of worth a pound of cure, as the old saying goes.
My computers here seem to never get infected. I watch out a bit and have the
security settings of my and my family's software just a notch higher, I use
the MVP hosts file on the machines and it weeds out innumerable and useless
3rd parties from the websites we visit and so on.
A tiny bit of effort goes so far has gone a long way. My infection rate over
the last 14 years nears that of Apple uses - one real infection on one
computer (mea culpa -- deliberately ignored a Windows 2000 IIS patch from
Microsoft back in 2001), maybe a second on XP a few months later (not sure,
not my fault, and didn't take the time to investigate -- just wiped and
reinstalled at the suspicion), yet I've run and enjoyed Windows on upwards
of 20 computers in the house since 1996 (turning off HTML & JavaScript in
email probably did wonders in those days lol).
Anyway, that's a fair number of computers with four people using them a lot
over 14 years.
People like Alias etc. may not enjoy such a report, but it speaks of what
one can do with Windows, if one puts just a tiny little effort into looking
at security issues -- which should be done no matter which platform -- UNIX
/ MacOS / Windows.
"ray" <ray@zianet.com> wrote in message
news:7vcmquFe9sU16@mid.individual.net...
> On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 09:12:57 -0500, SC Tom wrote:
>
>> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9D325542921A6thisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
>>> Alias <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalido> wrote in
>>> news:hmqs1l$tsq$1@news.eternal-september.org:
>>>
>>>> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9164438/
> Microsoft_s_security_chi
>>>> ef_suggests_Net_tax_to_clean_computers
>>>>
>>>> First Microsoft designs a system where most programs have to use the
>>>> registry/kernel. Now they want everyone to pay a tax for the cost of
>>>> going after the hackers who are merely taking advantage of a
>>>> vulnerable system. Yeah, Microsoft just loves its paying customers ...
>>>> NOT!
>>>
>>> Here's a funny statement.........
>>>
>>> "When a computer user allows malware to run on his computer, "you're
>>> not just accepting it for yourself, you're contaminating everyone
>>> around you," he said."
>>>
>>> When you *allow* malware to run !!! Thats a hoot !!!
>>>
>>>
>> Well, if you're not doing anything to prevent malware from infecting
>> your computer, you are, in essence, *allowing* it to run. It's the same
>> thing as letting someone obviously drunk borrow your car. You're
>> responsible for anyone/anything he hits.
>
> B.S. - if you're running a secure OS, you don't have to do anything.
892p5lh75kkgdsbliglhh9k319i15qe7l@4ax.com: