Slashdot Mirror


The Cost of Computer Naivete

wiredog writes "What happens when you put an unprotected Windows 98 box on a broadband connection? Two perspectives from two reporters for the Washington Post (frr,yyy): The User's " an odyssey that has taken $800 and roughly 48 man-hours over nearly three weeks" and Digital Doctor's "Her PC was in such bad shape, it required 10 1/2 hours of surgery to restore it to working condition.""

55 of 917 comments (clear)

  1. Slow computer! by NeoFunk · · Score: 4, Funny

    Geez... it takes 10 1/2 hours to install Linux these days? Have all distributions gone the way of Gentoo?

    1. Re:Slow computer! by jimicus · · Score: 4, Funny

      or reinstall Windows 98 or any OS...

      Yeah, but you know what happened:

      Tech: Heck, this is a mess. Best to reinstall the whole lot from scratch. You do have backups, right?
      User: B... Back--ups?
      Tech: (sigh)

    2. Re: Slow computer! by ReTay · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is it just me or should that guy be embarrassed to admit that he took 10.5 hours to reinstall an OS and a security suite? I realize that he took the long way to fix the issue. As far as I see it if ANYONE other then the client has had root on a box you can't trust it. Ever. You need to reinstall from known good media and start over.
      But maybe that is just me.

    3. Re:Slow computer! by jimicus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not the point. If the customer doesn't have backups of their work & you don't have easy access to some means of backing it up, you'll have to do it the hard way. (WTF are you doing such a job if you don't carry around a spare hard disk?!)

      If the customer simply doesn't like the sound of rebuilding from scratch, you'll have to do it the hard way.

      If the customer doesn't have access to original install media (and you're going to be a Good Little Tech and refuse to put pirated software on), you're going to have to do it the hard way.

    4. Re: Slow computer! by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful


      > Is it just me or should that guy be embarrassed to admit that he took 10.5 hours to reinstall an OS and a security suite?

      Embarrassed? If he was charging $45/hour he should be bragging about it.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    5. Re: Slow computer! by jedidiah · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What I think is shocking is the fact that the PC tech apparently did not feel it necessary to wipe the OS and start from scratch. Both these articles perpetrate the dangerous notion that being r00ted is recoverable. Once a system has been compromised, there's no telling what other nasties reside therein.

      This bit of info was sorely lacking from both articles.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    6. Re: Slow computer! by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "He should also be smacked in the head for not getting her off Windows 98. Windows 98 is 6+ years old. How many people here recommend 6 year old Linux distros?"

      I sometimes use and sometimes reccommend Windows 98. It doesn't have the security problems of XP/2000 (no Windows Messenger, no LDASS or whatever that was, no remote assistance, no product activation, no media player with evil crap in it, you can update it without revealing the software you use to Microsoft, the EULA doesn't allow Microsoft to impose new terms on you in the future, nor does it allow them to remotely install software on your machine. It's not as stable, but it only needs to run for long enough to play a game; nobody would be using Windows for any real work anyway, and you can dual-boot back to a proper operating system when you've finished playing the game.

      Oh yeah, and "flamebait" is the button you want to press. Reccomending windows98 indeed! Don't I know that the moderators are all MS guys, with their "if you administered a billion computers for a fortune-500 company like I do, you'd know..." attitude.

    7. Re: Slow computer! by BlueStraggler · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Honestly, only an idiot would pay that kind of money to have their drive wiped and os reloaded.

      Anybody whose data is worth less than their computer is just using it as a toy. Regaining access to your data is of far greater value than making the stupid hardware run. If it was one of my computers, I'd happily pay the $800 (or even $8000) to get my data back, and *then* I'd ditch the "ancient piece of crap machine" and buy a new one.

      (Well, actually, I keep distributed backups to avoid this problem, and use almost exclusively ancient piece of crap hardware since the machines themselves are irrelevant. So if it were my computer, I'd probably just spend the $800 on women and beer.)

  2. To be fair to Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    (Yeah I know, fair to Microsoft... on Slashdot!)

    Windows 98 is 6 years old and isn't sold with computers anymore. This test just shows remaining Windows 98 users they should keep up to date or upgrade to XP.

    1. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by HBI · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be fair, if I put up my 1996 version of Slackware on the net or a copy of System 7.5.3 on an old 68k Macintosh I wouldn't have these problems, at least not to that degree.

      I don't absolve Microsoft at all.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    2. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by sw149 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Mac OS 7 secure and stable as ever.

    3. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by Throtex · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you wanted to be really fair, I could say that I could put my Commodore 128 on the Internet and let anyone who telnets to it run anything they damned well please, and I still wouldn't have problems...

    4. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by Nick+of+NSTime · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Consider this for a moment. Jane Boxwine buys a brand-new computer in 1999. It's a Pentium II 400 with 128MB RAM, 8MB HD, and Windows 98. She spends $2000 on it.

      Jane Boxwine uses this computer for Quicken, maybe to email her family, Solitaire, and simple things like that. Her computer has not outlived its usefulness, but it is woefully underpowered by today's standards.

      So now you're telling her that she has to spend $100 on a Windows XP upgrade *and* install an OS that will be very noticeably slower on her machine? You're telling her that Microsoft made mistakes and now Jane has to pay for it?

      So what's the solution for Jane Boxwine?

    5. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by garcia · · Score: 5, Informative

      To be fair, if you installed a stock version of Slackware from 1996 on the net, without a firewall, you would be subject to known exploits either in the kernel or the userland programs that were included in the stock distribution.

    6. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Actually the ONLY time I was ever 0wn3d--either Windows or other--was with a circa 1996 version of RedHat!

      Someone got into my pc using the LPD Root Exploit. Of course, I was stupid enough to put a Linux box on the Internet with no firewall! Still my personal experience from that time was the Linux had a problem!

    7. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You mean the only time you were owned and knew it. With linux, software behaves consistently enough, that it's much more obvious when you've been nailed. The cable modem light blinking furiously, the hard drive whirring? Shit, something's up!

      With Windows, you're left wondering if that's normal behavior...

    8. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by JJahn · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think Jane should spend that $100 on some bottles of decent wine, instead of that crappy box wine.

    9. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by Obiwan+Kenobi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The question is rhetorical. There is no answer. You must either upgrade to a modern OS or suffer the consequences. This is definitely a Pro Linux (tm) situation, as it basically highlights the Upgrade-Or-Die mentality of the Redwood camp.

      But in a nutshell, yes, she does need to upgrade if she wishes to keep using her machine as she's used to doing. This is a new environment and Win98 is an old system that quickly bogs down when you try to band-aid it with differing programs such as Anti-Virus or Firewalls (though some are less bulky than others).

      Whenever I see a spyware-riddled PC, I reinstall Windows. There is no question. I've gone past running 3-4 different Ad/Spy-finder programs, and them all find something different, only to remove the invaders and then reboot and see that some hidden hook has returned most of them.

      This is the sort of madness that most Win98 users live in, and sooner or later abandon it for a smarter OS, which is usually WinXP but on those fringe cases will actually add another point to the statistics of the most stable and robust Mac OSX or even Linux (for those who don't need games).

      The solution is to change to something better, and growing pains will be involved. Is that a better answer?

    10. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by 4of12 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So what's the solution for Jane Boxwine?

      Switch!

      You make good points.

      But Jane's problem is that she knows about as much about her computer's operating system as she knows about the automatic transmission in her car.

      She bought these advanced devices (computers, cars) in good faith that since everyone else seemed to be buying them, they must work somehow, and if there's a problem, then a lot of people will be in the same boat trying to solve the same problem, so that solutions will be easy to come by.

      But there's more to Jane's computer problems than to her car problems: since she bought her PC, she's bought a bunch of convenient, shrink-wrapped boxes of software to run on that box.

      If Jane gets up the courage to switch to something like Mac OS X or Linux, she won't know how to deal with getting that shrink-wrapped Windows application and all of its weird data files from her Windows box onto the new application.

      Tragically for Jane, advantageously for Microsoft, there is a significant barrier discouraging her from switching to a competiting platform.

      If the Windows API were an free, complete openly-published standard that competing companies could implement, then this wouldn't be a problem.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    11. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Informative

      I know what it installed by default. It installed your ethernet, brought it up, installed telnet, brought it up, and left you to log in with NO ROOT PASSWORD. Thats the uber-secure linux of the past.

      Install that old slackware while connected to broadband, and if you decide to take a coffee break before logging in and setting the password (or if you forget to do it, or miss that line item in the install instructions) and you're fucked.

      Hell, those were my Uni days. We'd have a ball in the computer lab watching the one TA (total stereotype smelly bearded hippy geek with a bad attitude) install some new linux terms, and we'd race him (and beat him!) every time to log in as root and do various stupid things.

      Hell, I'd wager on 7 out of 10 student machines on the campus net never did get a root password set.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    12. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by DCheesi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Err, if you haven't noticed, many of the worst M$ security problems lately have affected only the WinNT codebase, including some that are WinXP-specific. As long as you're only running client apps, Win9x derivatives may actually be safer than the newer ones!

      The problem here isn't the OS version, it's that she didn't install the necessary security apps before exposing her computer to a direct internet connection. True, WinXP includes a very basic firewall app, but ZoneAlarm is just as easy to install and probably works better anyway...

    13. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But still back in 1996 Linux was made with high speed networking in mind. Windows 95, 98 were made with mostly dial up networking in mind. Linux in 1996 wasn't even seriously trying to invade desktop or even much of the server market. At this time Linux was just trying to go "Hello!!! We exist and we can do a lot of stuff that you 10k Unixes can do for free." So it was busy porting all the Unix utilities to it. So we had netscape 3.0 which didn't have enough features to support the viruses and spy-ware. While Windows 98 Has the market share Apple was dead, Unix was dead Linux was just a bit player for hackers. So Microsoft worked on putting on features to the product to sell more, and to kill off netscape. Integrated everything, that was the buzzword of the late 90s. No one really (Who had enough say at Microsoft) had foresight of todays problems to make windows 98 still run in 1994. So features were added. And if Linux had the technology at the time there was a good chance that they would do the same as well.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    14. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by mike449 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So what's the solution for Jane Boxwine?
      Switch!


      A router (with built-in firewall) is obviosly a better solution than a switch in this case.

    15. Re:To be fair to Microsoft by a_nonamiss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      OK, I hate defending Microsoft, but let's put this in proper perspective. Cars in the 1950's weren't required to have seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, etc. These innovations happened well after the 50's. You can still drive around proudly in a 1956 Belaire Convertible, but God help you if you hit a moped or a grounhog going 25MPH, because you will probably die a horrible, painful death. Nobody is asking Chevy to provide free retrofitted seatblets, airbags, etc., to increase public safety. Although these cars are not fit to drive by today's safety standards, they were considered safe when they were manufactured. If I were so motivated, I could probably take that '56 Belaire, weld some seatbelts to the frame, make some body modifications and if I was really good, maybe even retrofit some airbags in that puppy. It would be much safer, but considering the amount of time and skill required for such modifications, it would probably be a fraction of the cost to go out and buy a new car.

      As much as I feel for the poor woman stuck with Windows '98, I can't really agree that it's Microsoft's fault. When Windows 98 was invented, it was reasonably secure. Since then, there have been many innovations, and things have changed. It is severely outdated, but as long as you know what you're doing, you can keep it running, but in the hands of a novice, it can be dangerous. No different than an old car.

      --
      -Arthur
      Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
  3. Windows 98? What about XP? by Brain+Stew · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It is bad enough with 98, but what if the same experiment where conducted with XP, considering all the wild RPC attacks?

    --
    "Here's a spoiler: You're will die alone."-Triumph the Insult Comic Dog
    1. Re:Windows 98? What about XP? by MadRocketScientist · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My recent XP experiment:
      I was installing a firewall for a client a couple of months ago after they got a new DSL circuit installed. The connection failed, so I called the provider and was informed that the line was disabled for security violations. Someone had plugged in the WinXP home edition desktop before I got there. Needless to say, it was so laden with trojans we didn't bother trying to clean it, we just went straight to the system restore disk.

  4. They're idiots by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Her PC was in such bad shape, it required 10 1/2 hours of surgery to restore it to working condition."

    It takes me a lot shorter to install Win98 on a box and that includes saving any or all documents.
    1.5 hours tops.

    --
    This is the sig that says NI (again)
  5. Re:reg only? by Vacuum+Sux · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's said "Washington Post (frr,yyy)" Free Registration Required, Yadda Yadda Yadda.

    --
    In Soviet Russia, the profit overlords welcome you!
  6. Mantra by wbav · · Score: 5, Funny

    Whatever happened to:

    Format, fdisk, re-install do da, do da?

    Pull all the useful data off onto a spare disk and clean the machine. Just don't be like my neighbor, and wipe, then install your new os on the spare disk.

    --

    =================
    Unix is very user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are.
    1. Re:Mantra by aelbric · · Score: 5, Funny

      Format, fdisk, re-install do da, do da...

      Thanks. Took me a minute to put that to the tune of "Camptown Races". Then I started laughing. Sonn as I get mod points you get one.

      --
      nos laetus epulor qui would domito nos
  7. 10.5 Hours? by digitalvengeance · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Very few machines are worth 10.5 hours for me. Factoring in labor, I can save a lot of money by saving the data elsewhere then FDisking and reinstalling the OS. Even considering windows install time, program install time, and configuration, I don't have 10.5 hours in it and the user probably has a less glitchy machine for it.

    --
    How many roads must a man walk down? 42.
  8. Similar idea to what I wanted to try by British · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wanted to take a 98(non-second edition) box, no patches, no firewall, and no updates and visit a frew pr0n sites with IE, and see how much I could get it to be 0wned with spyware, plugins, popups, etc before it was rendered unsuable. Make it a competition to see how quickly it would bring the system down.

    The screenshots would have been hilarious. If I only had VMware.

  9. And I hope she buys a Mac next time by paulproteus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While Apple's track record on security isn't perfect, I hope she'll realize that she has these problems because she chooses to use Microsoft products. That it's a choice is debateable, given MSFT's documented predatory practices. However, it's ultimately up to her to stand up to the monopoly, since the government refused to.

    If she buys an Apple Mac computer next time, she will have a computer that functions better, works better, and breaks much more rarely than her current Windows computer. It's simple, really.

    (Me, I use Debian GNU/Linux because I value the freedom that is in Debian's goals. I recognize that Apple shares to some degree these goals, looking at its KHTML-based Safari goals.)

    Flame me, since many of you will, but consider that whether you blame the creators of Gator, Microsoft, or worm writers, she would have a better experience on a Mac.

    "choice"

    --
    |/usr/games/fortune
  10. Surgery? by kaleco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'Surgery' is a little misleading since it suggests hardware damage was incurred. If I was determined to use a metaphor, I'd go for 'therapy' :)

    --
    Prosperity is only an instrument to be used, not a deity to be worshipped. Calvin Coolidge
  11. It's Interesting by aynrandfan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I find it interesting (and a little frightening) how otherwise educated people (reporters, for instance) can be so clueless in critical areas. Is this inevitable for people?

    And yes, I do consider basic computer literacy a critical skill; your computer is not just an appliance. Letting your computer get 0wned is much like letting your car run out of oil.

    --

    ----

    "Ours was a free culture. It is becoming much less so."-Lawrence Lessig

  12. Yes but... by ColourlessGreenIdeas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Consider a hypothetical Win98 user. For the sake of argument call her 'my mum'. She runs a Pentium II-450 and uses it for email, word processing, web browsing and very occasional other bits of office. The computer runs all these tasks fine, but it really isn't powerful enough to run XP. Windows 2000 would make life better, but it will go out of support soon and if you worry about getting legal copies, it's not available in a home edition so it's very expensive. Windows ME can hardly be called an improvement.

    So you're saying people in this position need to spend money to upgrade their hardware despite the fact that the current computer runs all the software they want to run at a speed they find acceptable.

    Yes I know; install Linux.

    --
    In soviet russia stale jokes recycle you!
  13. This reminds me.. by manavendra · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ..of my initial days of tinkering around with RedHat 6.x.

    My old office had two RH boxes on a static IP. There was no such thing as an administrator. As a programmer, I was supposed to install all applications, configure them and also *ensure* it was up and running.

    Got a call from the ISP two days later. They had shut down the machine because of complaints from other users - apparently some application from these machines were flooding the network (I never did find out what they were doing though). Got the ISP to restart them. Frantic googling and few "security guide" downloads later, I started exploring what was wrong with them (incidentally, I was *still* accessing those machines remotely - my office wouldn't pay for me to go to the site to check the machines). Turned out there were THREE rootkits installed on one of thsoe machines. Found the traces of one of the possible three attackers - was some IP space in netherlands. Later found that that range of IP addresses was actually under contention and was thought to be not allocated and probably belonged to some malicious/rogue ISPs (I haven't understood this part yet).

    Not knowing much, I got them to reinstall the OS. Of the three, two rootkits appeared within 2 days. Another re-install, this time with the Linux security guide implementations for securing the box. Things were ok for about 2 weeks or so. I then had yet another attack and someone was using my box as a IRC relay host (or something) and I was still in trouble.

    Finally, after some RH updates and more tweaks (and ipchains and iptables install/config), I was able to have reasonably secure machines.

    Trial by fire, but I learnt a lot!

    *shiver. I hate to think how it would have been, had those been '98 machines

    --
    http://efil.blogspot.com/
  14. Not uncommon by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My mother's machine was the same way. Win 98, no windows updates for nearly three years. On a cable broadband connection, no firewall. Anti-virus wasn't updated since 2000.

    Between an updated McAfee, Ad-aware, and a few other spyware removal tools - I spent nearly eight hours on getting her machine back to a working condition. Once I was able to back up her data, I formatted and moved her to XP Pro.

    She had enough trouble learning XP - I wouldn't dare put Linux in front of her.

    Almost 20 viruses.
    Over 150 spyware components, files, etc.
    Three hours of Windows Updates to download over a broadband connection.

    Don't clickety-click on everything on your screen. Some of those links are bad.

  15. Hosts File by ejdmoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I bet he didn't check the hosts file. I bet that was null routing the liveupdate DNS records.


    Once the infections were removed, LiveUpdate still could not retrieve the latest virus-targeting data. So I gave up on that and uninstalled and reinstalled the entire Norton AntiVirus program, hoping that its update system would work afterward -- but it did not. I again tried to access Microsoft's Windows Update Web site, but IE still failed to respond.

    Suspecting a problem with Internet Explorer itself, I tried to repair IE using the Add/Remove Programs control panel. That didn't work either, producing an error message that indicated some file or files necessary for IE were damaged or inaccessible. Trying to restore the previous version of IE, 5.5, yielded no benefit, either.

    Finally, I abandoned ship, reinstalling the entire Windows 98 operating system to repair the damage to Internet Explorer and allow Kathleen's computer to access the Internet and update the Norton AntiVirus definitions.


    I always check that file. It always gets hijacked. I'd be willing to bet that was his problem.

  16. Needs an `OBVIOUS` tag by Wingchild · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A few years back a buddy of mine came over to my apartment and plugged into my hub. I wasn't using a router at the time, just a hub with a WAN port for broadband. (I know it sounds terrible, but I keep my system configured according to DISA's security guidelines; sometimes I feel like testing it against real-world attacks. Bit of a masochistic streak.) I was running a locked-down Win2k box; he brought an unsecured Win98 system -- with it's C drive shared. To EVERYONE.

    Things were going pretty well, and we left the systems on overnight. When we signed back on in the morning, my machine was fine; his machine had been compromised -- in grand style. We found the following:

    - two separate users were connected to it.
    - Cygwin, which my friend had managed to break and wasn't operational, had been either repaired or reinstalled.
    - gcc was added.
    - eight (!) separate viruses were on the system; two had been compiled with the local gcc, from the look of it.
    - those viruses were being sent out around the net.

    The main data on the system was not compromised and while there was a minor virus infection, for the most part things were not touched. I should say, "things were not touched that we could detect" -- they could have taken a full copy of his HD for all I know, not that anything important was on there (it was just a gaming box).

    He probably wouldn't have noticed the attack itself except that his processor wasn't all that hot and he was on a 10M/sec network card; between the heavy compiling and the constant sending of virii system performance had dropped noticably.

    The fix?

    Unplug from the internet, make sure no data on the box is needed, and format it back to the stone age. It isn't like reinstalls take a long time. (Backups are your friends. :) )
  17. She was right on the cusp of greatness by jgorkos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:
    "What a revelation: Four programs -- one a firewall and three to combat spyware -- I downloaded FREE worked better than one I paid through the nose for. Why would anyone create these terrific programs for free? Often, as in the case of ZoneAlarm, they hope people will like the product so much they will buy an upgrade or, in the case of the spyware, pay to subscribe for upgrades."

    She was right in the middle of the trees, and couldn't see the forest... yes, free software, even WINDOWS free software, works better and does what it says it does.

    Talk about leading horses to water...

  18. Neatly illustrated by maximilln · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I finally decided to install Apache. I had been running an ftpd for a long time to transfer files between home/work/family/friends but so many of them began asking for me to appeal to the least common denominator that I finally did the apt-get install apache. Honestly speaking it was the easiest fileserver I've ever set up. Granted I didn't look into authentication or restricting access yet. I simply wanted to install it and offer files. In terms of basic functionality apache was much easier to achieve liftoff than ftpd or samba.

    Here's the rub that fits with this article: Apache was not up and running for more than 2 hours before I had 3 IP addresses, two of them on my own ISPs /24, poking around for overflow vulnerabilities by sending SEARCH and GET requests with more than 8190 bytes.

    Why can't these script kiddies be stopped? It is obvious what the intent was.

    --
    +++ATHZ 99:5:80
  19. Not necessarily by cprincipe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For example, a tax accountant would probably think you clueless if you ended up having a big tax bill on April 15. Paying your taxes properly is a critical skill, since everyone has to do it.

    Or a doctor would think you clueless if your cholesterol was over 200. It's (usually) quite simple to keep your blood cholesterol low.

    Unless it has happened to them or someone they know, most computer users are unaware of things like spyware, virii, etc.

    --

    bun-fhuinneog agam!

  20. MS is, alas, targeted Re:To be fair to Microsoft by swschrad · · Score: 4, Interesting

    and a switch is definitely in order. when you have blight, nematodes, and rot in a soybean field, you have to rotate out of soybeans and plant anything else unrelated for several years to clear the land.

    in the MS software monoculture, we are also at that point. pick Mac OS or Linux, but switch. you can't grow anything in that MS patch any more.

    if you can't/wont, I have had multiple update choke-n-hangs with norton antivirus in the last year plus. each has finally been resolved by switching that user to Grisoft's AVG program, www.grisoft.com... and using Zone Alarm and Ad-Aware to deal with the other types of threats.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  21. The fact is... by jb_nizet · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's now a major pain to install a windows system from scratch, using the original CD.
    You now have to
    - think about getting the latest service pack first
    - think about getting a firewall with its license key (love it when the firewalls ask to be registered before working, and need an internet connection to be registered!),
    - think about getting an anti-virus (same story)
    - then install the system (disconnected from the network, of course, so forget about "configuring an internet account" during the install)
    - install the service pack
    - install the firewall and the anti-virus and make sure that they're running
    - go to windows-update and patch your system
    - start to play.

    This is an impossible task for 99% of the regular windows users, who don't even know what a firewall is and how to configure it. There have been improvements in the installation process of OSes and applications, in order to make it possible for reg. users, but all these efforts have been ruined by virus and worm writers.
    And I'm not even talking about spyware, adware and spam...

  22. Disagree with your conclusions by siskbc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Windows 98 is 6 years old and isn't sold with computers anymore. This test just shows remaining Windows 98 users they should keep up to date or upgrade to XP.

    First, no it doesn't - they didn't do the necessary control experiment, which would be leaving an unpatched, no-AV machine with XP hanging around on the broadband network. Do that and your box is fried a lot faster than 98.

    ...I have some Win 98 boxen around here, as well as some Win XP/2K. I have MANY more problems from the newer boxes, mainly because most of the newer worms are no longer "compatible" with the older machines.

    Yes, it's security by obscurity, but that's good in addition to having current antivirus signatures! With the XP/2K machines, we can't patch them fast enough to keep them clean on our notoriously insecure university network. The 98 machines are dedicated to running some specific lab hardware, and are sufficient to the task. They aren't getting replaced, or upgraded. Well, I did upgrade them from 95, but even I'm not that crazy. ;)

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  23. Making ghost images by Alioth · · Score: 5, Informative

    You don't need any stinking non-Free software to make ghost images.

    Here's how you do it:

    0. Set up a recipient (either a second hard disk, a machine on the network - whatever - I do it over the network)
    1. Boot Knoppix on the machine you want to ghost.
    2. Mount the destination.
    3. dd if=/dev/hda bs=128K | gzip > /path/to/image.gz

    To restore:
    0. Set up the source.
    1. Boot Knoppix on the machine you want to install.
    3. Mount the source.
    4. gzip -dc /path/to/image.gz | dd of=/dev/hda bs=128K

    Tips: Overwrite any free space on the machine you want to ghost with a huge file filled with 0x00, then delete the file. The disk image will compress much better as you've scrubbed the deleted files.

    I use a system like this to ghost many machines at a time (an image server can easily deal out 30+ images at once). It'd cost a fortune to license many copies of ghosting software - with Knoppix and a very small shell script, I've got an automated system which will do many machines at once. (A typical 40GB fresh WinXP install with our apps compresses to under 1GB with gzip).
    If you're doing WinXP, remember to either make a Sysprep build or use something like System Internals free (open source but not truly free) tool to change the SID and hostname of the machine when it's booted the first time. (This is the approach we use due to the limitations of sysprep).

    1. Re:Making ghost images by vvg · · Score: 4, Informative
      You can also use partimage instead of dd. The advantage is that partimage does not copy unused areas.

      I also save the MBR and the output of fdisk -l seperately.

      Beware that support for NTFS is still experimental.

  24. Email to Kathleen Day by Phil+Wherry · · Score: 5, Informative

    I saw this in the Washington Post yesterday and thought it interesting enough to send the reporter (Kathleen Day) a note, which follows, summing up my thoughts on the matter. I haven't heard anything back yet (and I don't necessarily expect to).

    -Phil

    Ms. Day:

    I find it absolutely fascinating that problems such as the one you encountered are treated primarily as a user education issue. It's true that there are some things that everyone needs to know in order to use a computer. It's also true that savvy users can often avoid security mistakes. But one wonders, "Why is it that users *have* to be security-savvy in order to effectively use their computers?" I'd submit that the problems you wrote about are mostly the result of design flaws and not naivete. In many ways, I think the computer industry has set the bar far too low by blaming users for problems it has created. Put another way: what would you think if you had a car that would sometimes break down without warning if you drove it on the highway without first buying additional parts?

    As I see it, there are two design weaknesses that contributed to the problems that you wrote about. First, basically anything you do on a machine running Windows is done with full administrative privileges. In one way, this makes sense: you own the machine, so you should be able to do anything you want with it. The problem, however, is that this blind trust allows malicious software to do pretty well whatever it wants. Most other operating systems (Mac OS X, Linux, and Unix) require you to take some special action (usually typing a password) in order to install software or alter the operating system. While this can't prevent you from choosing to install malicious software, it makes it quite difficult to do so unknowingly. To stretch the car analogy a little further: people can't modify your car's engine without your knowing about it because you have to open to hood in order to reach it. Computers should work the same way.

    The second problem is that Windows doesn't make a strong distinction between programs (the applications that you run) and data (documents and the like). This makes several attacks a lot easier, as malicious programs can sneak onto your machine by masquerading as data when you are browsing the Internet. For most non-Windows operating systems, there's something that you have to do explicitly to say, "This is a program and it's OK to run it." If Windows has these protections, there still wouldn't be anything to stop someone from maliciously sending you data you didn't want--but your computer wouldn't be able to then run that data as if it were one of your programs.

    It's a mistake to say that anything is totally secure. There have been (and will continue to be) successful attacks on operating systems other than Windows, of course. But I think it's a mistake to think that Windows has so many (and such severe) attacks just because of its dominant market position. True, it's low-hanging fruit for those with a malicious bent. But it's also so much easier to attack Windows because of the way it's been designed.

    The very concept of a computer virus depends on both of these two factors. Take away the administrative powers, and the virus has little if anything to infect. Remove the confusion between programs and data, and it becomes much more difficult for malicious software to spread. Many regard it as unnecessary to run antivirus software at all on non-Windows systems. While I'm personally not sure that's a good idea, it does give one an idea of the relative security levels involved.

    I think these security problems may ultimately threaten Microsoft's market position. The bad design decisions that are part of Windows weren't made because Microsoft is dumb (quite the contrary: they employ a lot of very smart developers and architects). They were made for market-driven reasons. Lots of old software (dating back to old versions of Windows and the even older days of MS-DOS) simply won't run in a more secure environment. As

  25. Re:Whose fault is it? The ISP. by Rick+Genter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I maintain computers for a set of Curves for Women gyms owned by a couple of friends of mine. I run into the spyware/malware problem all the time.

    Each gym uses DSL to connect to the internet. While working on one of the computers this weekend, I noticed that McAfee Personal Firewall (I stopped using Norton a while ago) wasn't seeing any inbound events, unlike the other gyms where it sees 10,000 to 20,000 events per week. A little investigation showed that the DSL modem at this site has a built-in DHCP server/router/firewall/NAT function. Seems like the DSL providers are getting a clue and building necessary capabilities into the hardware that the customer has to have just to connect to the Internet.

    --
    Don't underestimate the power of The Source
  26. Stinger & Ad-Aware Nothing More by Concrete+Nomad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I do this for a living. I work a regular job trading futures, but I've been playing with computers since I was 6 or so. It is the easiest money to make. I could charge tons, but I just charge around $100 bucks for 1-6 hours of work and usually people are so happy I make everything work that they give me food and beer.

    It boils down to having a USB key with 5 programs. They all fit on a 16MB key. Sometimes if I know my client has a virus program ahead of time I will download the definitions, but not that often.

    People's problems are always the same. Virus and spyware. I don't recommend that most people use a software firewall since everyone just gets click happy. I usually tell them to just get a router. I have yet to get a call back from any of my clients and each time I do see them they say they never have any problems. They also like the fact that the router is just a one time buy rather than constantly buying new software and upgrading. I know there are free programs out there, but most people just don't trust them (beats me why).

  27. Tips, and a list of known rogue spyware cleaners by Alien54 · · Score: 5, Informative
    He went down the merry path of trying to rescue the system in order to keep customer data intact. The story is typical of someone who is entering the fray without have their tools prepared in advance. The solution always looks easier than it really is.

    In his case, he needed

    • a CD with all of the relevent tools and updates
    • a windows boot disk with CD support
    • an understanding of the windows command line in order to copy a subset of these tools to a convenient folder on the hard drive from the CD
    • The knowledge to run these tools from Safe mode, and how to get there in the first place
    • Include in the subset of tools one that can fix the broken LSP setup.

      [LSP or Layered Service Provider is a piece of software that can be inserted into the Windows TCP/IP handler like a link in a chain. However, due to bugs in the LSP software or deletion of the software, this chain can get broken, rendering the user unable to access the Internet. Spyware is good at this, and some cleaners leave a broken LSP behind.

      With the correct tool, the fix takes seconds. Without the tool, you need to uninstall and re-install the winsocket, or else the same with the entire network support. Otherwise you fall into the trap this poor bloke got into.]

    tips - I deal with this stuff all of the time. The best data on this stuff can be found in articles at spywareinfo.net - the forums are not bad either, although spywarewarrior.com also has good forums. also good to have is this list of known rogue spyware cleaners, along with this list of Anti-Spyware Orphans & Outcasts

    My current recommended free antivirus is Avast! Home Edition, which is very low maintenance for the home user, and requires registration for the free license. It also protect a number of common Instant Messenger clients, as well as several common P2P clients. It is better than AVG in my opinion, and detects many trojans as well as spyware.

    You can get a system that is so hosed that it will not boot, not even into safe mode, even under XP. The solution there to remove the hard drive, drop it into an external drive enclosure, and hook it up to another system where you can use scanning software to do a basic clean so you can boot in the original configuration. Once it boots you can install cleaners from safe mode, and then run cleaners from inside every user account.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  28. Re:Tips, and a list of known rogue spyware cleaner by CerebusUS · · Score: 4, Informative

    Besides, the typical "mod parent up" post, can I recommend creating a BartPE boot CD with those tools you mention on it. Then you can skip the step of mounting the hosed drive in another machine.

    I used a generic BartPE disk this last weekend to copy a friend's data off a system that was so badly hosed it wouldn't let me log in.

    Nice stuff.

  29. I just went through this by Durandal64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My girlfriend's aunt's computer was acting up, and they asked if I could fix it. They complained about pop-ups mainly. When I sat down at the computer, it was just excruciatingly slow. After I finally got the hardware properties to display, I saw that they were running a 2.6 GHz P4 with 512 MB of RAM and a Radeon 9800 Pro. But spyware alone had brought that computer to its knees. It was a mess.

    I installed Ad-Aware and Spybot and let both of them run, and just got rid of everything. I removed a ton of crap with Add/Remove Programs, as well (lots of online casino shit and other useless garbage). I then removed those irritating TVMedia pop-ups by booting into Safe Mode and removing the necessary programs and running Hijack This.

    I explained to them that, by running Spybot and Ad-Aware regularly, as well as keeping Windows up to date with Windows Update, they could keep their computer mostly clean. But one point I made very clear to them was never to use Internet Explorer unless absolutely necessary. I downloaded Firefox for them and set it as the default browser. I explained that Internet Explorer was probably the cause of 90% of their problems, because it's possible for websites to install things silently by using it or any number of other undesirable things. So I made it very clear that they should stick with Firefox. I also uninstalled Kazaa and installed Kazaa Lite for the kids.

    Now their computer is running as it should. No more pop-ups or any shit like that. It took about 3 hours, but I did a damn fine job with that box, and they were grateful. All throughout that ordeal, I was thinking, "God I'm so glad I'm a Mac user."

  30. Old joke alert by plover · · Score: 4, Funny

    Q: What's the difference between a used-car salesman and a computer salesman?
    A: The used-car salesman knows when he's lying.

    --
    John