Slashdot Mirror
Comcast Cuts Infected PCs' Network Connections
fidget42 writes "I just noticed this article over at Infoworld. It seems that Comcast is finally doing something about the machines on their network that are being used by spammers. They are now cutting off service to those customers who have computers that have been hijacked by spammers. Now, if only other broadband ISPs would start policing their user base ..."
Now, if only other broadband ISPs would start policing their user base ..."
ATTBI (back in 2002) was disabling people's account for being infected with worms... People's modem CFG file would be set to disabled.cfg and they would have block sync but wouldn't be permitted onto the network.
If Comcast took over from ATTBI and is using parts of their existing network, I just can't understand why modems were not being disabled recently for infection by worms.
Because we all know Corporations policing is a VERY GOOD THING!tm
You'd be first in line to moan about them 'infringing' on your interweb right!
Doesn't this force those users to go out to CompUSA and buy a copy of McAfee or Norton antivirus?
Blocking web access also means that those users aren't able to download good, free virus scanners like Grisoft's AVG.
I have been pwned because my
For example, I administer a mail server, and occasionally have to mail a virus or spam to myself to check that the filters are operating correctly. It would be very inconvenient if I got my connection pulled each time that happened.
I know anecdotal evidence is pretty much worthless, but my friend got infected with all sorts of nasty ad/malwares, along with Blaster and a couple other worms. Cox deactivated his cable modem, he had to call them and go through phone hell to get his service back. So I'm not really sure it's only Comcast doing this.
I'm on top of my game like I'm standin' on Xbox.
... would be to put the network connection onto a quarantined sub-net where all the necessary virus removal tools were available. Once the machine was cleaned up, it would be allowed general network access again.
This reminds me of the idea of putting people in jail for debt. Bankruptcy amounts to a life sentence, since there was no possible way a person could make up the sum of money while in jail, away from the work force.
How can these people fix the problem without access to up-to-date patches and virus scans?
There is a certain responsibility that comes with being a part of the internet, one that has become greatly understated since the commoditization and commercialization of the 'net as a whole: do not become a danger or a malfeasance to the rest of the machines that are also connected.
Unfortunately, this is something that seems to be lost on the clients of broadband always-on connections, especially those that are used by folks with little or no proficiency. While they have no intention of becoming spam-hosts, or DDOS platforms, by not keeping their machines protected against the various evils that lie in waiting out there, they unwittingly become part of the problem.
This does not reduce the hassles and costs to other sysadmins and users of the 'net as a whole. That said, it seems only fair for an ISP to mitigate the problem by pulling the connection of a user whose systems(s) are spewing out malware.
There are reasonable precautions one should take, that is, having a good firewall, keeping the machine patched and having good virus protection. No, this does not come without some effort and not always without cost. But, to be connected to the internet full-time, it is a cost of doing business, not unlike having insurance for your car in case you cause an accident. Liability insurance is to protect the public, and you from losing everything should you do harm to others. Keeping worms, trojans and viruses off of your machine also protect not only you but others as well.
So, it is really a matter of responsibility.
It's about the easiest thing ion the world for the ISP to and it's _very_ effective. Another option would be for ISP's to force all SMTP traffic through their own mailserver and virus scan it. They could easily spot a home user sending a couple of thousand messages in an hour or one spreading infected email everywhere.
If you want unfettered access you can pay for a co-lo box and take the responsibility too. People can't keep hiding behind their ISP and dynamic IPs. I'm all for personal freedoms on the net, but with freedom comes responsibility. Deal with it.
That's all well and good, but . . .
I work for one of the largest meta-ISPs. To put things simply, my employer operates the back-end of of a few hundred interest services. Said employer shall remain nameless, and no, my email address does not reflect said employer.
Anyway. I'm a graveyard shift network operator. There isn't a whole lot to do on the graveyard shift except make sure nothing bursts into flames. So I'm pretty bored until about 5am when our authentication logs gets rolled into the database.
And this is when i can go through all the complaints about spam, viruses, port scans, and whatever else our teeming masses of end users have perpetrated, and figure out exactly who's computer is doing what. And then shut 'em off.
I agree completely that it would be great if there were some way i could efficiently get the end user to disinfect or secure their systems without having to resort to strong-arm tactics, but the truth is that, for 99.99999% of home users, disabling their supply of email and porn is the only way we can get them to sit up and pay attention.
Think about it. If you got some popup on your screen that said you have a virus and your internet connection is at risk, you'd just close it and go about your business. Unless your connection didn't work, and then you'd call customer service and try and get it 'fixed'.
Heck, most people get popups that tell them that sort of thing all the time.
Would a smart person trust that the 'free' antivirus tools are indeed what they claim to be without some way of independently verifying that? I sure wouldn't.
Would an *average end user be able to use them effectively? That joke isn't even funny. I did my time in tech support - the sheer number of people who have asked me what a comma is while I'm trying to help them disable call waiting on their phone line are shadowed only by the monumental stupidity of the woman who was overheard - on several calls - shouting at her husband - over and over - "IT'S THE A IN THE CIRCLE! THE *A* IN THE *CIRCLE*!!!". It would be funnier if it didn't make one lose all faith in the future of humanity.
Furthermore, have you considered the liability issues here? You want a corporation to tell a user to run a program that proports to remove a virus from their system? a FREE program? What happens when it runs across some new variant of some virus, thinks it's the old variant, does the wrong thing to remove it, and ends up rendering the whole system inoperable? I'll tell you what, some arm-chair attorney is going to threaten legal action. You have no idea how frequently this really happens. Even if you so much as recommend third party software.
So we cut 'em off. Just to force them to call us. And then we tell them, essentially, "Look, buddy. Your computer has this problem. And your computer's problem is our problem. And that makes it your problem. We don't care what you do to solve this problem, but you better do it. We suggest antivirus software as a first step. We hear that you can get a free version of something called AVG."
And then, if they seem to understand, we turn their connection back on, so that they can update their norton or download avg or whatever.
And every week, there's two or three end users who get their accounts totally closed because we've been over this with them three times already and they haven't managed to get the picture.
I wish there were a kinder, gentler way to do it. So far, I don't think there is.
This is just like television, only you can see much further.
I have a suggestion.
Write up a small business plan based around these knocked-off-the-network infected PCs.
You can charge "$50 + travel fees. Usually under $100" to clean their computer, and get them back online. Yeah. It's a fee, and many people wont be happy about paying it. But, at the same time, it'll teach them a lesson about security on their pc. If they dont want to pay it again, theyll have to do their own security stuff.
You see politics, I see opportunity.
The only real trick to this would be streamlining with comcast, which is next to impossible.
no
"I couldn't fly out to look at the laptop and the employee couldn't exactly just send the computer and work from nothing. I had this person seek local help, and after several attempts Comcast still shut down internet service....this is horrendous for the average end-user." What's horrendous for the end user you speak of is not that Comcast acted responsibly by cutting off a spam zombie's access, but that your IT department has not provided adequate support for remote users.
My other machine is a lever.
A few minutes before I found this thread today I received an automated message from lafn.org. In that message it stated very clearly that it was an automated process that was blacklisting a /24 around a machine on one of our dialup netblocks that was caught sending mail to one of their spamtraps. That user is of course infected as are probably 50% IF NOT MORE of our customers. Our customers, no matter how big they are, no matter how big a customer they *think* they are, no matter what service they pay for have the right to cause 252 other customers at any given moment to be blacklisted. If they think they are that important then we sure as hell don't need them as a customer.