Slashdot Mirror
Broadband Access Leading to Internet Breakdown?
"Spam, adware, worms and viruses are now able to propagate much faster than ever before. Worms are also growing bigger, more advanced, as it's possible to transfer more viral code in less time. It's as if slow dial-up lines acted as a kind of immune system that prevented effective propagation of worms and made DDoS attacks so much less significant.
I'm not only worried about viruses and spam levels. Part of the reason the MPAA and RIAA are taking such an interest in Internet activity is that file sharing has become so much easier with the availability of broadband, and as usual there are murmerings of regulation. Before the broadband revolution, the involvement of the MPAA and RIAA in Internet affairs was small, and their argument was less convincing.
As broadband grows, will regulation become necessary not just to prevent illegal distribution of copyrighted material but more likely to protect Internet users from themselves (we're already seeing ISPs adding spam e-mail filtering to their default services, for example)? Will the Internet fall in popularity as it becomes more and more frustrating and dangerous to use, or will we simply see a massive improvement in coding practices and more secure software?"
Obviously, the time to distribute fixed and patches goes down as well. As does the ability to spread the word about things going around... I see the "always on" thing as more of a security risk than the higher speed, definately.
replacing it with NEW Folger's Crystals! (lets see if they notice the difference)
The web is in danger of nothing. More importantly, the Internet is more important to commerce than ever before.
Unless a large, physical attack on the wires carrying all this data occurs, everything is pretty much A-OK.
I have been pwned because my
I suppose it depends on how you define the current freedom. I don't believe that it is going to lead to increased censorship. I don't believe it is going to lead to increased tracking or monitoring (although certainly other things, like the recent FBI/DOJ request for increased wiretapping ability may do just that).
I think that it will lead to increased filtering on the ISP side of things. More ISPs will be using Spam Assasin and similar programs behind the scenes. Undoubtedly, some legitimate e-mails will be caught by these SPAM traps, and the end-user might not have access to them.
Personally, since Dartmouth College starting running virus scanners and SPAM filters and the like, I constantly get e-mails where the "suspicious" file was automatically removed, and although most of those removals were viruses, I also lose legitimate files that are sent to me. As an end-user, I don't have access to change the settings or tell the system that a file is, in fact, OK. Instead, I have to e-mail the person back and ask them to resend the file to my AOL account.
I suspect that as more people use cable and DSL and the malware increases, this behind-the-scene tinkering will increase.
A serious blow to current freedoms on the Internet? I'm not sure. A pain in the ass? Absolutely.
99% of the people you ask would say not having broadband would be the biggest blow to their freedom on the internet... unfortunately we have to take the good with the bad, or start kicking people off the net...
Come on - the virus and worm anaology is a great one to make lots of ... but they aren't evolving under Darwinian survival of then fitest .... if anything it's more of a creationist sort of thing with rival gods throwing their latest creations into the world to battle it out with nature (ie the rest of us who provide the medium for them to live in) and each other
Imminent death of net predicted.
My amazing wife - Artist, Author, Philosopher - Laurie M
While unix boxes went through 25 years (since ARPA contracted UCBerkeley to make this "TCP" thingy) of evolution on networks that were, in retrospect, pretty safe.
The Morris Worm in '88 woke a lot of us up, but we've known for decades about "doors" and "locks" and such.
Windows is/was/and will be a consumer operating systems whose main impetus is features to push sales. Security hasn't appeared to be on their radar screen except as a check box ("did you think about security?" Um, yeah. "Good enough for us. Ship it").
I'm getting hammered by spam and worms and EVERYTIME I nmap back to the sender (okay 0.001% of senders, randomly chosen as I get pissed off), it's a windows box.
I love broadband.
I love VOIP to mom and video and streaming stuff to relatives (all legal)
I hate the bad neighbors running windows. The metaphorical slaughterhouse next door.
Email is one of the biggest threat vectors.
When email gets fixed (through authenticated access), the worms and virii will need to find a new way to spread.
This is in addition to the more obivous effect of cutting down the overall flow of spam.
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
Wasn't IPv6, combined with proper filtering supposed to curb these problems?
Alot of the blame falls on the ISP, they helped turn the Internet into a always-on appliance, now they have to make it robust.
Why does my ISP allow packets off my network that obviously don't originate from it? Is it considered a feature to allow DoS attacks? Why is port 25 open by default? Why isn't NetBIOS closed by default? Where is the IPv6 testbed that my ISP was supposed to have had 3 years ago?
Granted, the average Joe User can be an idiot, but part of the ISP's job is to make the Internet more idiot-proof.
How could you make a case to go back to dial-up? How about ditching your phone and just using snail mail? I have difficulty seeing how faster communication is ever bad. Not perfect, certainly, and the flaws need work, but the the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.
...And every little old lady that comes in and purchases a DSL circuit for email makes me cringe.
All I can think is that she's just another virus infection waiting to happen on my network.
For some, it's senseless and stupid to have a broadband connection. I mean, my bread and butter requires that people DO have a DSL circuit, but there's no sense of responsibility with their internet connection.
People bitch all the time about spam, and how to get rid of it. That same person comes in and has a SMTP relay cleaned off their system a month later. They can complain about it, but they don't realize they're part of the problem as well.
Then there are those that come in and tell me to my face "Bah, I don't care if I have a virus, it just makes things a little slower." Those people piss me off the most. Those same people get pissed when I shut their connections off because they're sending out 20 messages/second, drowing their outbound pipe.
I swear. Sometimes I think owning a computer should require a license.
Can you ping me now? Gooood! | Manhappenin.Net - Things to do
I work at a local mom and pop computer store, and it seems like somewhere around half of all PCs brought in with problems stem from broadband used improperly.
/. aside) can't deal with it. They destroy the usuability of their PCs with it.
We had one guy come in, who had always-on Comcast cable, the same provider I use myself. He had bought a PC from us roughly 2 weeks before, and was hell bent that the "piece of shit" we sold him was to blame. Of course, no antivirus, no firewall, AOL for broadband added...so much spyware. That AdAware count was, I kid you not, 3,250 or so.
As a person who has to deal with people like this quite often, it's not hard for me to see the side of an ISP who would LIKE to impose restrictions. There is also part of me who wouldn't be against it. As much as I would like unfettered access, I know most people (those on
So I have mixed feelings on all this. What would I like to see? You have no fetters, at first. Then, you start acting as a spam relay or something, you get restrictions (I know, this happens, and I applaud for it). You act as a waypoint to spread viri and trojans, cut back another notch. And so on. This should all be spelled out in the license agreement, but I think it's nearing necessary.
Internet usage is not a RIGHT. It's a PRIVILEDGE. And it's one you should have to be responsible to keep.
Those who change will survive. E.g. learn to patch your system, avoid insecure behaviour and tighten up your network [e.g. firewall, NAT, etc...].
Those who don't will find their computer experience horrible and "die off" as far as the market is concerned.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Like most things, it depends.
If worms, virii, spam, etc. don't become more damaging than they are now, the status qou will be maintained.
If, on the other hand, bad guy capabilities increase until someone does something that takes lives and/or billions of dollars, then I think we'll see legislation to deal with it seriously.
Don't forget, too, that if the internet becomes too damn annoying or risky to use, people will stop using it. Seems to me that's a more likely way that my internet freedom will be restricted.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
You must be new here.
am going to write that lame joke you thought I would.
Instead i would like to say that the Internet is not a medium that should be regulated or cencored.
If the dumb users are getting hurt by its wildness, that same darwinism should do its work.
And if we will see more secure software? Dont hold your breath.
The system had the verbosity of HTML combined with all the readability of compiled assembly viewed as bitmap images
I don't know about you all, but if you have an open node in the net you WILL be owned on 56K or broadband. The virus might -spread- faster, but it won't destabilize the long term growth of the net.
You'll be surprised at how fast ISP's implement manditory transparent virus/worm filering if the problem ever reaches the levels that you're implying. 2/4 ISP's that I've dealt with filtered back orifice without notifying customers.
Question:
Would anyone mind spending $2/month extra for an ISP to implement manditory WORM/Virus filters? If you want to play with them, use your LAN! This would solve all the worlds hunger problems!!!
Bye!
Just load Windows XP and Office onto a Pentium 2 with 64mb of RAM - that'll slow those dang worms to a halt if not the PC itself.
Potentially the most useful Windows box ever built.
You are missing the point.
Look at what is causing all of these outbreaks. Windows/Windows users.
If there were no windows users, none of the current virus epidemics would be a problem.
You think that virus's on another mainstream OS would take over? Doubtful.
Consider the distribution of OS's left (-windows): you get a melange of flavors. Virus writers would have to be far more sophisticated to hijack that number of dissimilar systems with one set of code.
Starfish by Peter Watts, ISBN: 0812575857
and its sequel
Maelstrom by Peter Watts, ISBN: 0812566793
The second book focuses more on the viral evolution but they are both good books overall
I still find it mystifying that any ISP would allow/encourage users to directly connect completely unprotected machines to a high-speed internet connection.
Sure, Windows could be better in terms of security, but that wouldn't even be a problem if all those insecure services were behind (even a minimal) firewall.
-Mark
(My DSL account came with a "free" firewall-enabled router)
I need to verify this, but it appears there is an epidemic of of conceited self-victimizing individuals who tragically suffer from grand, paranoid delusions about their posts being intelligent yet relocated.
Well, as long as his coding slaves continue to release patches for unexploited exploits, I think those of us that work in the wierd world of windows server support will continue to have jobs. Irregardless of how big the worms get. Broadband is happening, metropolitan wireless networks are becoming a reality, and society almost completely shuts down if the internet stops responding. We're already driving down the road and I don't see too many off-ramps to save us from complete immersion.
One virus vector is plain old portscanning......
But you can't portscan 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 possible addresses very fast.
But IPv6 is a ways off, yet.
What we will see is an emergence of firewalls, etc, that make things more difficult for spam and viruses.
And my guess is that the backbones will also grow, as there is a lot of dark fibre left over from the internet boom. And for the RIAA, I think the genie is out of the bottle. Even mailing disks around would perpetuate it.
Fellowship 9/11
A digital divide is probably more likely, as most people on broadband are accessing fuller multi-media experiences while poor souls have to avoid big-combo sites.
I think from the history of technology advancement, things always get bigger, better, faster, strong etc, and they usually don't break themselves down in the process.
Take our transportation for example, when the gravel roads got too crowded, we paved them, then widened them, then built highway motorway causeway, then we moved to train, light-rail, bullettrain.
At first we only tried to travel a short distance if you had to do it by foot, when we have cars, we want to travel further and eventually it is too far for cars, and we move to flights etc etc.
The cycle just keeps going.
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
The problem is the transformation of most nodes of the Internet from peers to clients. That's what's going on with broadband; they lure you to the service with speed and reliability then after you're in they let you know you can't run any services and they're putting a mandatory (and poorly-run) spam filter on your incoming mail.
You're no longer part of the network. You're only a consumer and spectator. Spam is bad but RBLs like SPEWS and the admins that force them on their users can be worse. There used to be a time when you could hook into the Internet and go pretty much anywhere you wanted to go; today everybody wants to lock you down and force you to pay for things you once enjoyed for nothing or move to a different server because of some political battle over spam. When people like John Gilmore get screwed for running a mailserver, or a website like Something Awful has its business operations hampered, I can see the writing on the wall.
We need to get back to the days of having Internet access being a utility, much like electricity or water, where one could hook in and use it any way one will. The looming threat is control, lockdown, and homogenization that promises to render this medium as stale as commercial radio.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
I have mediacom cable internet. Quite fast but if DSL was here, I'd consider taking it. Why? because mediacom does not allow servers.
Reading through thier various offers is interesting. Not only do they not want home users to run servers, but they even want to limit servers to certain business users, too.
In my opinion, this is going to lead to less people offering content on the web, as the bandwidth becomes more restrictive, and your choices decrease down to a few broadband options.This is in direct contrast to the mid-90's promise of the net where it was seen that anyone would be able to put up any thing.
I feel very sad, myself: I pay boupcoup bucks for a good connection (at least, compared to dialup) but I can't do jack shit with it (at least I can't do 2/3rds of what any healthy geek would want). Barely seems worth it.
If your messages are encrypted, then you don't have to worry about automated programs kicking them for their content or attachments. That will be up to the decrypting party. I pity the ISP that starts blocking messages because they are encrypted.
Learn how to cryptographically sign your mail on Mac OS X 10.3
No, because with a cable modem connection I can order a Powerbook faster than ever.
The best defense against viruses is a healthy immune system, and an organism gains a healthy immune system through exposure to germs and viruses.
The current "epidemic" of viruses serves only to strengthen the immune systems various groups are developing to regulate the wider ecosystem - the net.
There will always be change, and one of the drivers of change is chaos.
"If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of car payments." Earl Wilson
like Bob Metcalfe did when he predicted "gigalapses" of the internet?
sulli
RTFJ.
I think the proliferation of broadband has helped the internet become a more valuable tool for the average 2.5-kids-having-explorer-driving-all-American-fami ly, which has caused it to be a greater part of all our lives. As such, it is now on the radar for the type of people who are threatened by anything beyond their control.
The more we become dependent on the internet, the more interest there will be in regulating it. The level of freedom, possibility, and power that the internet affords to the average person is simply unprecedented. Freedom of the press belongs to those who own a press. With the advent of the internet, the average soccer-mom now has a press that can publish to the entire world for pennies.
Attempts to regulate and lock-down the net are inevitable. It is the nature of those who seek power for themselves to deny and control the power afforded to others.
The possibility of always-on connections spewing a constant stream of malware and sludge is just an excuse. The proliferation of broadband is dangerous because it put the issue on the map and a very high level of power in the hands of the people.
The Dalai Llama
Citizen of a nation where freedom of speech, bought with the blood of heroes, is used to spread pr0n and reality TV shows.
My sig could be your sig!
Just put a clause in the contract. If a PC is put onto the network without antivirus and firewall and it gets infected (thus becoming a threat to the ISP), the account is immediately terminated without right of appeal.... in theory ISPs could already do this (as infected machines are often spam vectors and spamming already has such penalties) but an explicit contract stops them saying they didn't know.
Publicise it... make sure that the ordinary users are given every chance to comply (a CD that automatically installs Norton should do it), and that's 90% of the problem solved.
If it wasn't for cheap and noisy PC's which can't be left on because the racket they emit is disturbing to their owners, this could become an epidemic.
"If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of car payments." Earl Wilson
Often on talk radio I hear them discussing 'controversial' issues like how the internet is bad because of all the "porn sites popping up out of nowhere" and how it - the internet - needs to be heavily regulated. FFS. The problem is not the road; the problem is that shitty car that you're driving!
Irregardless is not a word.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Make a standard, fairly simple test that you must pass before you are allowed onto the internet. This test only needs about 3 questions. First, can you turn on the computer by yourself. Secondly, can you setup and or access e-mail by yourself. Thirdly, when you set up your e-mail, you should immediately e-mail the licensing agency. They should respond with an e-mail that completely looks like a virus. If you open the program attached, you fail. This program should promptly erase your hard drive so you will pose less of a threat.
If I drive fast enough at the red light, it'll appear green.
didn't read article.... didn't understand story.... don't grasp implications... I"LL BASH MICROSOFT INSTEAD!!
Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
Look at all the big worms we've had so far this year. They haven't been exploits of security holes, they've all been worms that people receive in their e-mail and then double click on.
Sure with broadband their double clicking takes action faster, but I don't really think that's the problem. The problem is that there are so many more people online now than there was two years ago, and a large chunk of them do not have the knowledge to deal with viruses in their email. Double click now, worry later.
People do NOT pay attention to what they are opening, I do IT for a small business, and we haven't had any machines infected yet. All of the viruses are caught at the mail server and replaced with a text attachment stating "THERE WAS A VIRUS ATTACHED BUT IT HAS BEEN REMOVED BY THE VIRUS SCANNER.TXT" and the same people day after day will forward me the message or call me on the phone and ask if the message is a virus.
Yeah, I know. Everyone has their own fix for the problem, but I really think these steps would take care of most of it.
1. Free firewall software from an ISP for all Windows boxes. I really don't think ZoneLabs would charge too much for an ISP to distribute the free version of ZoneAlarm. Ditto that for AdAware or Spybot S&D.
2. Free virus-scanning of all email. Don't scan for spam and forward through all virus-stripped email just in case it contains important information. I know, most viruses are ONLY viruses, but you never know what may come later.
3. Have ISPs monitor port 25. If traffic is seen, test it for an open relay. This could be part of the contract the customer would sign. If it's an open relay, block it and tell the customer to clean up the machine if they want it open.
4. Once a new major virus such as MSBlast hits, monitor for it's traffic and block appropriately or take them offline until it's fixed. Of course the virtual network with cleaning tools is a good idea, also.
If this doesn't happen (and I don't expect it to) people with computers HAVE to learn that running a computer hooked up to the Internet is a responsibility. If they can't learn how to manage it properly, they should hire someone to do it. You have to maintain your car and people don't complain too much about it. If they do, people may feel sorry for them, but that's as much slack as they get. Don't fix it? Don't drive.
But why is the rum gone?
Please, more powerful tools, in the hands of people who know how to use them, lead to greater productivity, not pandemonium. Did the evolution of muzzle-loader muskets into M-16's spark a global surge in violence? D'oh, bad example...okay, the growth of axes into chainsaws helped mankind...deforest our planet at an astonishing rate. There must be a good example here somewhere. Single-prop airplanes into 737's...lead to air and noise pollution. Well, you see where I'm going with this. More powerful tech is only bad if someone uses it in a bad way...which someone always does.
"In a 32-bit world, you're a 2-bit user. You've got your own newsgroup, alt.total.loser." -Weird Al
"As bandwidth costs become cheaper and more people adopt cable or DSL over standard dial-up connections,"
Where is this happening? Cable connection runs in the $40-$50/month range right now. A couple of years ago you could get them for about $35 in my area.
There really doesn't seem to be any price pressures on broadband access yet. Most places have either DSL or Cable. Some places have both. Neither the telcos (who do DSL) nor the Cable cos seem inclined to compete on price yet. Maybe when wireless broadband or broadband over powerlines become more common you'll start to see some competition.
After noting the current surge in Internet worms and the so-called Darwinist evolution of these things into more and more powerful incarnations,
It's not exactly Darwinian evolution. These things don't mutate on their own, people change them.
Can you say "Clipper chip"?
Unfortunately, governments (and especially ours) aren't exactly known for learning their lesson the first time around. This is likely a battle we'll have to fight again, and soon.
-----Chaz
More bandwidth is good because then bad germs will kill more weak hosts faster.
ISPs that can't be bothered to filter out the viruses are the primary cause of all this damage.
Today, almost all viruses are weapons to attack home PCs, installing spambots. If the ISPs had even been marginally responsible as these epidemics started, rather than fostering the spread of ever-more-dangerous virii, today's problems would be several orders of magnitude less than they are.
That has nothing to do with broadband per se. It has to do with trying to make a buck by externalizing all costs ... changing the Internet from a place where
organizations were responsible, to one where irresponsibility
became the norm.
There are lots of real-world examples of people being held responsible for their actions. You can't just go screwing people to give them AIDS, for example. Or firing guns into crowds. And there are plenty of places where littering gives reasonable fines (hundreds of dollars).
Isn't that what this is all about? The noobs don't know how to swim, but they are hell bent on jumping into the deep end.
/. article asking questions for Mike Godwin about legal issues on the web. Let's face it, and check me here, but stupid is still free as best I know. Sadly, it is the best some can afford.
I have moderated some large message boards, by way of an analogy. They always start off with a small group of people that get comfortable with the tone of voice, the technology involved, and they then set the trend for that one site. If the tone is right (i.e., inviting) tons of people start showing up. If you build it, they will come and all that. You'd think that would be a good thing, but it invariably leads to becoming "a victim of your own success".
You get people that have no idea what have gone on before, but show up and start demanding to be heard. Major soap box time. And God help 'em if they don't get taken seriously, or get criticized because they are reinventing the wheel or any of a number of other things.
This dovetails nicely with the
Is there a crackdown on surfing habits in the future? Maybe. On the whole, it probably wouldn't be a bad thing since most issues would be related to security type items (antivirus requirements, firewalling, OS patches, etc) as has been noted. Would things like this impact the "old timers"? Probably not, and the noobs wouldn't even know the difference anyway.
Remember, the question wasn't about freedom of speech, copyright issues, IP, etc., but the propagation of crap.
Broadband connection, analog connection, it doesn't matter. The abuses are the same (read "deranged indifference" as abuses). It's like the Austin Powers movie where the guy gets run over by a steam roller. The end result is the same, it just takes a lot longer than getting hit by a Porsche. The outcome is inevitable, in my mind. It is just a matter of how quickly we get there.
I've found that most folks like to be told how to make their computers more secure and decrease their chances of infection/spyware...
I have made it standard practice to install 3 applications on all Windoze machines that I fix anything on...
1) Install Avast! Home Edition and set it to do automatic updates of both the Core Program and Virus Database. Because most people don't pay for Anti-Virus upgrades after their free trial version runs out...not to mention the fact that Avast! is better than Norton and most for-pay AV apps anyhow...
2) Install Spybot Search & Destroy and make sure that the primary user(s) see what the result of the initial scan is (shock value) with instructions on how to use the app...
3) Install FireFox (no link needed) with the follofing userContent.css...
If they still insist on using IE I will install Google Toolbar and enable popup blocking...
I then proceed to replace any spyware apps with free non-spyware apps (WeatherBug -> Weather Pulse, etc)
As for a firewall, I talked most into buying a wireless router (generally a cheap 802.11b router) to use as a firewall and future network upgrades. I don't think any windoze software firewalls are very good...IPTables is about the ONLY software firewall that I trust...
After doing this, I find that these systems stay fairly clean and have much fewer problems. Not to mention the owners of said machines tend to be much happier afterward.
I also have an IPv6 tunnel to that remote (by 3k miles) box. Protocol 41/port25 is not filtered :)
The all new, shiny, "UhOh"'s (this decade) style CONSUMER internet is not the [D]ARPA-Net that some of us grew up with. Not even the "rough town" internet of the mid 90s to the late 90s.
No this is the network for those people who believe that one network of the Internet is the "intranet." Where even those that thought SMB and IPX were good ideas were considered "technical." (I remember the first time I deal with a Novell network, asking my friend the admin how to turn off the curses interface and get to the real command line. "No, that's it." I setup my Sun IPC to do print and file service and his box with PC-NFS and asked why they thought novell was worth $20k) (the IPC was fairly used at the time, but BSDi 1.0 was just out too, for less on them Pentium/33s).
The consumer net has people who need protection. Perhaps under the banner of "to help them" but just as important is to protect ME from them.
I long ago proposed that AOL, Compusa, Prodigy (the trailer park of the Internet) and those guys have OC48's between them and a 56k modem to the rest of us. Didn't happen and now those people are all around dumping sewage into our streams.
I'm about set to refuse mail that DIDN'T come from an IPv6 address and regress.
So filter port 25. The net is in crisis from the consumer FatPipe providers.
Motivate the vendors (MS, but also the Linux distros, Sun and everyone else to NOT COME OUT OF THE BOX WITH 20+ ports listening!!).
I clean up hacked Linux and Sun regularly. We need "echo" on for WHAT good reason? If Sun can't come up with a simple CLI tool to manage inetd.conf (it's a perl script), then they shouldn't be playing on the net.
Linux needs rpc's by default why?
99%* of linux user use packages built by strangers for what good reason? (at least with source, 1 of thousand of users can LOOK at mutt-1.4i.tar.gz that md5 checksums to:
a67bcdf1a1cd53d61ccd3ebf3993ba59
With a binary, it's a crapshoot.
The internet is a bad neighborhood and some folks need protecting and we need protecting from some folks. Just don't tell gramma that we're walling her IN, just 'splain that the wall is to keep the baddies OUT.)
--
Mr Cranky
(in my 22nd year of using this new fangled "network" thingy. Archie was good enough for me.)
* ok, I made up 99% but anyone have real numbers that frighten less?
I work for a small ISP, and things are absolutely improving behind the scenes. Most old broadband network designs were not built with the present day in mind. It was, perhaps, shortsighted, but who saw this coming?
We're installing dedicated spam/virus filtering machines. We're changing our network drastically, going from a very simple network structure to one where every DSL bridge's ATM channel is carried up to a router doing Proxy-ARP, so we can cut out broadcast traffic and regulate traffic for every customer's connection (cutting down on both viruses spread via broadcast traffic as well as DoS attacks).
On top of that, we police the network to find users with viruses, then call them and, if they can't do it themselves, clean their PCs for free.
Things are definitely picking up on the ISP end. Now if only the customers would take a few steps...
"I'm not only worried about viruses and spam levels. Part of the reason the MPAA and RIAA are taking such an interest in Internet activity is that file sharing has become so much easier with the availability of broadband, and as usual there are murmerings of regulation. Before the broadband revolution, the involvement of the MPAA and RIAA in Internet affairs was small, and their argument was less convincing. "
If you're using the internet to violate copyright laws, that is not an exercise in freedom, but instead an exercise infringing on someone elses rights. The fact that you weren't caught before doesn't mean the internet is becoming less free. It means there is less anarchy on the internet.
Vote for Pedro
Well there's solutions to some of these problems, but nobody would really want to implement them.
.exe to their entire adressbook via their ISP's mail server.
Let's talk about spam and adware: Outlaw it. Why is it proving to be so hard to kick congress off their fat lazy asses and make it easier for people to smack these bitches where it hurts, their wallets? Given what happened with the do not call list you'd think this would be a piece of cake. Why is adware even permitted to exist? You'd think with all the heightened security concern that methods of running unwanted code without a user's consent or knowledge of its installation would be a major issue.
Viruses/worms/trojans: Change the way email works. Step one, NO ATTATCHMENTS. Seriously, why the hell are we using email to shuttle files around? It was not designed for this. What alternative is there for people to share files? I dunno, maybe P2P? Or maybe personal web servers? But wait, that's bad, then broadband providers would have to allow upstream that isn't horribly crippled or god forbid minor webservers on their networks. Let's look at the advantages of sending a link to a file on your machine in an email versus attatching the file:
1. Reduced mail traffic. If your mail goes out to a 100 person list, and only 5 people care to check out the file, only the bandwidth for those 5 is used.
2. Traceable distribution path. We know where the file came from, even if it's malicious code, someone is accountable for hosting it. It's just slightly harder to infect a user's machine, start up a webserver unknowingly, host a file, and trojan a link into their emails than just spew an
Peer to peer copyright infringement: Face it, it's here, it's not going away. Either make what people want to watch and hear available when they want it for a price they won't balk at, or suffer. I mean how impractical is this? Itunes doesn't seem to be having any problems. Maybe it's not so much people are unwilling to pay for a movie or a CD as they are unwilling to go down to a store and get something overpriced or find out it's out of stock. Maybe it's easier to consume TV by watching exactly the episode you want of the show you like without having to plan your day around it. Not everything downloaded is even available for sale. People want it, but companies aren't supplying it, so they're going the less than legal route to get it. There will always be piracy for any medium, people taped CDs and the radio and copied VHS tapes. P2P is just making access to content easier. If there isn't enough legal content or the access isn't easy enough, guess what people will go to instead? I would rather pay what the average monthly cable bill is and be able to search for and download whatever TV episodes or movies I wanted to watch than pay it to have to wait for them to come on so I could watch them or record them. It's not about the money.
Introducing the new Occam Fusion! Now with sqrt(-1) fewer blades!
Let's take a look at your assumptions.
There is no such thing. Dialup just happens to be cheaper if you don't use the Net heavily, and to be universally available. There ain't anything standard about it.
Nor is broadband what people really need. Rid them of the actual dialing time delays, and they will live happily with 128Kbps or even 64Kbps. This would be somewhat cheaper, would make these users less interesting to be targetted by spammers, and would help webdesigner go slow with flash and fancy graphics.
So what we need is competition in the last mile Net connections, so that this bandwidth madness is checked.
Now, perhaps MS users should be required to have firewalls by default, and to give permission for ISPs to routinely check them for virii, spyware and the such? Perhaps partition all ISPs in MS Windows and the sane world, the MS Windows world being firewalled at the ISP so that MS Windows users can only do so much harm to their fellow sufferers?
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
Turning off connections and refusing to turn them on until the problem is fixed. If ISPs started doing this, people would start patching, geting anti-virus software and so on. Your average person doesn't care if they get infected since it doesn't affect them in ways they notice. Not having Internet, they'll notice and care about. What's more, they'll probably have to pay to have it fixed, either by taking it to a shop or buying software. This gives them even more incentive to prevent future occurances.
Who says it hasn't happened already? I remember when the Internet only exercised censorship over advertisements. Now the ads are free, the naked girls aren't, and if you wanted to see how a bomb works the FBI and the CIA will fight over who gets to shoot you first.
(Not that I ever download, or condone the use of pornography, or building bombs. Please don't shoot me, Ashcroft. =))
I'd like to point out that I haven't been infected by a worm or virus yet. Thats not to say my system is bug free.. though linux does have its ups when it comes to security. As far as spam goes, mail delivery needs to be redesigned. And not one of these dumbass MS solutions of a nickle an email.
The road between democracy and tyranny is paved with secrecy in the name of security.
Windows XP has a software firewall that is simple, but works pretty well for most users. Stateful, permits outbound, denys inbound. It will allow inbound upon user request (in the config menu) or program request (not sure how that works). It's off by default.
However, it's not going to be for long. Service Pack 2 is going to turn it on by default. This will cause plenty of whining and MS bashing, I'm sure, but hopefully it will help a little bit.
However the main problem these days is with attachment-clicking syndrome. Most viruses don't come through exploits, they just come through e-mail. For every one like Blaster that uses an exploit there are 500 like Bagel that go via e-mail attachment. People need to learn to quit opening random attachments.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
There are mitigating factors, and ironically most of it is tied to the baby Bells and their competitors.
Every communication line is multiplexed. In other words, a telephone trunk line open to the public at large may actually only be able to handle 1/10 of the total possible traffic.
But broadband lines have been multiplexed much worse.
So that as long as everyone does not use broadband, the speeds are high; but as soon as everyone goes over to it, guess what will happen?
And then those who want the speed they had in the beginning will get a new offer: pay twice as much again and you can have it back. And so forth.
So things are faster now, but it's not a constant upward curve.
This idea of broadband access creating a "breeding ground" for new malicious code as well as allowing the code to be spread more rapidly and universally seems to parrallel the problems that have been facing public health officials for the last century.
With the increase in human mobility due to cars, trains, planes, etc. more people can come in contact from disparate places more rapidly and more often. This has resulted in once isolated diseases with limited scope becoming important health concerns. SARS is a prime example. Toronto became an infected city, though thousands of miles away from the epicenter. Yet we develop technology to aid in the detection and treatment of diseases. We don't, though, regulate people's movement. Temporarily there might be economic forces that isolate areas (i.e. airline travel stops due to lack of demand) but such effedts are temporary.
I don't see a need to necessarily worry that broadband access's negative effects will trigger overregulation. Instead, I think that systems will be developed that mimic biologic systems. Oftentimes, evolution has produced solutions to complex problems in very elegant ways that we could not have developed using traditional methods.
I don't see how the two are closely related. IMO, more broadband will increase freedom because it will give more people more access to larger amounts of information. Also, an "always on" connection will encourage more people to host their own websites and share even more information. As the threat from viruses increases, those who don't take the time to learn about and protect themselves from the risks will be removed from the pool of people participating. I think people will quickly learn to buy virus software and click the "yes, I want to install that update" button. The internet is too great a resource for people not to invest the time and effort to maintain their link to it.
Today's broadband ISPs are a bit more sophisticated than the shabby dialup operations of yesteryear. Now they offer as standard spam & viruses filtering, NAT, real routers as opposed to modems, and more.
Also more and more mere users have come to understand the importance of patching, disabling services, not trusting attachments etc and even Microsoft is supposed to be shipping some kind of firewall software as standard now.
Things are not as one-sided as it looks.
Most Linux install disks will clean a PC. Not only will they clean the PC of the infection, but they will also clean it of spyware, as well as greedware. And it's free.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
The advent of widespread broadband access, per se, is hardly cause for a breakdown in basic Internet functionality. Talk about inferring cause and effect. What is responsible is a breakdown in the caliber of the network user. Prior to the Internet being opened for public access, you had primarily large-scale governmental, corporate or institutional users, any of whom are (presumably) a harder target than the average Dell owner with a Surfboard. By the logic of this post, it would make perfect sense to restrict everyone to 110 bps Baudot communications in order to make it harder for worms to proliferate. That's ridiculous. What needs to be done is to secure the network, by both the end user and the connectivity provider. Blaming high transfer rates is, well, like trying to cure diarrhea by tinkering with the plumbing in your bathroom. If you try to treat a problem symptomatically, rather than analytically, you are unlikely to find a cure.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Earplugs! Haven't you ever tried them? They work wonders with my noisy PC... Huh?! What did you say?
Free Firefox news reader.
Are you sure about that? I thought it was signs of some *software* breaking down. Keep in mind that the vast majority of regular users who doesn't have much insight in security are coincidentally also using one of the least secure operating systems with Internet access.
Maybe the inter... ahem, software would heal with new development philosophies?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
The internet is a free scale network. If you look up some of the information behind such a network you would realize a few KNOWNS
Believe it or not a free scall network and the Internet:
Can not be destroyed
Can not be owned
Individual or single entitites on it only have minimel impact (HUBS having the most influeance, and I don't me devices)
No one can even fully understand the complete workings of the internet.
These are almost FACTs, I know some may despute them but with out going to deep into the concepts I can asure you that Broadband or a Nuclear War will not destry the internet (Though it might lower its usage a little)
-- Disclaimer: I can't really back up anything I post on