Slashdot Mirror
Intel Enters Anti-Virus Market
Jack writes "ITO holds a story on latest Intel investment: "Intel is branching into anti-virus security with a $16 million investment in Czech anti-virus software vendor Grisoft. Grisoft's AVG anti-virus is used on more than 25 million computers worldwide, according to the company."
Is it too early to expect built-in virus protection from Intel CPUs in the future? Like an extension of Centrino?
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
If an Intel processor could be made to have hardware-based virus detection, integrating with this software-based virus detection, the team could be a very powerful deterrant to any future virus outbreaks. Imagine the hardware and software components working side by side to protect systems, giving future virus writers another hurdle to be cleared, when developing new virus infestations.
Hopefully the virus software can be made more efficient as well, so that running virus software on a system won't bog it down, hogging system resources like crazy, making people want to not run virus software in the first place. This has long been the bane of the majority of software packages, as the slowdown they cause for certain users, especially gamers, has made them desire to not run the software packages on their systems, resulting in these systems being more vulnerable to a virus outbreak.
Another added benefit that I can see from Intel buying this software, is that eventually if they integrate software and hardware aspects into a cohesive package that is well-implemented and able to fight viruses at a better efficiency then other programs, this will cause Intel based processors to stand out as well, as these days, virus protection and spyware protection are very important to the majority of users out there.
If Intel does this right, this can raise the bar for future processing efforts. Soon there will be more to consider when buying a new system then processing speed and cache size, might have to start considering integrated software as well in the not so distant future...
Good luck on this one Intel...
Need a Nerd?
Nerd Systems
how many of those are AVG free?
Does this mean that they're no longer going to release AVG updates?
I hope there remains a free version of AVG. That's what I install on the few windows machines I maintain for people. It's a lot easier to convince people to run antivirus software when they don't have to pay for it.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
Any clue on why this might be a good strategic move for Intel?
I mean, it seems a bit random in that it's miles away from their 'core competencies' in chip design/manufacturing.
AVG download page
I've used the free version of AVG for a few years now and it has been very good to me. I just hope that with this infuse of money Grisoft doesn't become too "corporate."
Nothing disturbs me more than blind loyalism towards some unrealistic and over-idealistic notion of one's nationality.
... makes for consistent revenue, makes stable companies.
I can imagine some guy at Intel has been screaming "diversify" - wide-eyed, panic-stricken, for a while now.
un burrito me trampeó.
Didn't Intel used to sell LanDesk AV software?
AVG is great for me because it barely uses any system resources. I run a small company with older hardware and it runs great on there. Much better than something like Norton which can really bog down one of those machines
Not quite 'buying over the company' as partnering with a local Czech VC to buy over a majority stake from another Czech VC firm.
From the press release on Grisoft's website:
Grisoft announces investment by Intel Capital and Enterprise Investors
Prague, Czech Republic - September 6th, 2005 - Grisoft, one of the leading providers of anti-virus security software, announced today that Enterprise Investors (EI), the largest private equity firm in Central and Eastern Europe, and Intel Capital, Intel Corporation's venture investment fund, have made a substantial investment in the company.
The $52 million investment in Grisoft by Enterprise Investors and Intel Capital will result in a new ownership structure of the company, with a majority stake being acquired from current owners Benson Oak Capital. As a result of this strategic transaction, the two new investors will own a 65% stake in Grisoft.
Windows is very much associated with Intel (ie. the term "Wintel" systems, for instance). Each time a virus, worm, etc., damages or destroys a massive number of Windows systems, Intel ends up looking very bad. In general, Intel PCs are known to be susceptible to malicious software, even though that is mainly due to the widespread use of Windows, and not directly related to the Intel chips.
So it greatly benefits them to improve the image of their chips, security-wise. This is something that others should be looking into as well. The PHP developers, while they do not develop hardware, do develop a very similar product. Both an Intel CPU and the PHP interpreter provide an instruction execution environment. As with nearly any such system, abuse is possible. That is why the PHP developers should follow Intel's lead, and create solutions that will help prevent third-party scripts from running amok, and thus tarnishing PHP's reputation.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Anyone ever notice that the Gmail Notifier takes up 10 megs of memory? What is it doing with all that memory?
I use AVG on all my machines. It just makes sense, like F-Prot did back in the DOS days.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
World's top chip maker into anti-virus? Soon McDonalds will be building their own, oil refinery.
Virus Found: AdvancedMediaDestruction.worm
Threat: 5
Ease of Removal: 3
Symptoms: Unit performs well in games and does not get nearly as hot under normal operation.
Removal Instructions:
1) Unplug computer and peripherals.
2) Take off side panel.
3) Locate large heatsink/fan and remove from chasis.
4) Remove the underlying chip (Warning: May cause demonic possession if not removed violently enough).
After which, you must replace the motherboard to fully alleviate all issues.
Prevention: Use Intel.
that the AVG code will now be "optimised" to cras^H^H^H^H run-slowly on AMD CPU's?
Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
if your intrested in tech like that you need to look at DEP .. is seems to me better than a hardware virus scaner as it makes their methods of invasion almost useless the new intel chips support hardware DEP and server 2003 & XPSP2 support it (although it isnt' set to the most picky level in XP which makes it pointless)
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
Their free product worked fine for me till I got tired of nursemaiding Windows. In fact if I can't avoid buying a box with Windoomed on it, or had to dual-boot, I'd be happy to use AVG. I think I saw their professional product on a store shelf recently.
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
So, this isn't Intel entering the anti-virus market. It's Intel Capital (the company's capital investment arm) making an investment in an software company. They're not buying the company, they're just picking up a chunk of it -- it's just like you or me buying stock.
http://www.symantec.com/press/1998/n980928.html
I think this is great news, I love AVG anti-virus. I also end up working on pc's that are infected to the point where norton is too broken to work. AVG always seems to be able to remove the viruses that norton can't.
AVG does a pretty good job but Avast is better for normal scanning. I'm not sure which is faster when you scan everything on the machine. Avast though does a great job of keeping itself current.
Just because you run Linux/BSD doesn't mean you don't need an anti-virus! Sure, the risks are minimal, but virii do occur on those platforms!
;)
ClamAV is free, and at all good apt repositories - go install
Intel makes a general purpose CPU, and it works just fine. They shouldn't be responsible for fixing their hardware (thinking of the hardware AV idea) because of software that someone wrote to run on it that has undesirable effects to the end user. Similiarly, the PHP developers shouldn't be bothered to fix the (common?) mistakes made by hobbyists or otherwise.
Dear Intel, please don't take away the free version. And please for the love of God don't add a billion useless features to it. Just let the group that puts out the free version do its thing. AVG works well, updates often, and is light on resources. Losing that would suck especially for home users who among other things do NOT need yet another subscription fee tacked onto their monthly bills!
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
Microsoft seems to have a good strong competative pattern that they've been doing. I don't know if Intel can compete. Microsoft's pattern is:
1. Create an Operating System
2. Look at what software is successful and making money on that Operating System.
3. Create Microsoft version of same software
4. Integrate said software into the OS and use Windows leverage to force OEM's and manufacturers to bundle preinstalled on most computers.
So far, this has pretty much worked and usually kills whatever piece of software was successful on Windows. I think its about to happen with antivirus software. I dont know if Intel or the other antivirus companies can compete with this. What do you think?
Why is Intel getting into the virus writing business? Aren't there enough virus writers out there doing this for free? We don't need the virus writers to be payed for doing this work! Is this some misguided plan to force everyone to run Linux?
:)
Oh, wait, did it say anti-virus? Never mind.
Remember, this is the real world. Things aren't always fair, and things don't always go as perhaps they ideally should.
While Intel probably shouldn't be responsible for helping prevent some of the problems associated with Windows, they should very well act so as to protect their image. Limiting the association of malicious software with their processors is a very good start. That is something that they alone must do, however, regardless of what Microsoft does.
Likewise for the developers of PHP. Sure, they can stand back and always blame the third-party developers who write shitty, insecure scripts. Or they could do the sensible thing, and take some action. Put measures in place to prevent, or at the very least limit, the ability of poorly written third-party scripts to reflect poorly on PHP.
It's far more beneficial for Intel or the PHP developers to act, rather than just throw blame around while their public images are decimated. Throwing blame around solves nothing, while taking real, technological action may very well prevent the problems in the first place.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Tell your tech to check it out. We use it on all of our school computers and it doesn't slow anything down.
Have you hugged your penguin today?
I would love to see the developers of PHP take a similar route. Their product has often looked very bad as of late, mainly due to security flaws in third-party software written in PHP. While the developers themselves are not to blame, they could still work towards limiting the damage caused by poorly written scripts.
By that reasoning, the developers of C and C++ should be held accountable for the flaws in Windows! If the guys who write the C compiler aren't responsible for Microsoft's mistakes, why are the developers of PHP responsible for all the shitty code in PHPBB?
Lots of people are asking about integration of hardware virus detection into the CPU or mainboard. People seem to think it's cool
.isn't this one of the legitimate promises of DRM?
But . . .
Was a beacon of hope in the freeware = spyware world. Guess we're gonna kiss that one goodbye too :\
Sigs are for Terrorists.
Interesting. AVG is the only AV software I've found that doesn't slow my machines to a crawl.
I briefly had AVG-Free on our receptionists computer because it was too old and slow [P2-400] to run our company's official client [McAfee]. We finally got her a new computer so it got McAfee. It sucked. It was originally set to scan zip and encoded files. It made Thunderbird take like 2 minutes to open any emails [even without attachments]. AVG was set to scan open archives as well, but it never had a problem...
So for me, when I'm forced to used Windows, I'll stick with AVG. It was the only AV software I was willing to pay for to use on my wife's business computer.
Nothing to see here
I tried the free AVG version but the interface was clunky.
IIRC Intel used to have an AV product namely Intel LanDesk manager. Then they sold it to Symantec which became NAVCE (Norton Anti Virus Corporate Edition) and now SAVCE.
Who will guard the guards?
Ummm, for all practical purposes, yes it does.
*eyeroll*
ClamAV is free, and at all good apt repositories - go install
Pointless unless you're scanning mail or are a Windows fileserver.
Why does the industry need to revolve around fixing Microsoft's problems?
snip
They shouldn't be responsible for fixing their hardware (thinking of the hardware AV idea) because of software that someone wrote to run on it that has undesirable effects to the end user.
Why? Cash!
You're right, Intel shouldn't be responsible for fixing Microsoft's problems. I'm certain they don't feel that way. Fixing Microsoft's problems, though, is worth millions of dollars. Assuming Intel is looking to build an anti-virus system at the CPU or chipset level (pure conjecture, but let's just assume), they wouldn't be doing it because they feel a responsibility to do so. Rather, they'd be looking for a competitive advantage over AMD, and another reason for customers to ditch their perfectly good (but three year-old) 2.0 Ghz Pentium 4.
Of course, I'm not even sure how such a hardware anti-virus would work, other than something similar to the NX system on the x86-64 chips. If such a beast does rear its head, though, rest assured that it won't be because someone felt a moral responsibility to fix some Microsoft bugs.
BBSpot reported on this ages ago!
p rocessor.html
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/05/intel_virus_co
Don't bother with Cygwin just for AV. Clamwin is pretty sweet. No real-time scanning, but installation and configuration is fairly straight-forward -- and the database is updated several times a day.
The biggest problem it faces may be that it's so plain and easy to use that people have trouble accepting that it's as good as all the colorful commercial offerings they see. I wonder if Intel's gonna keep AVG's viruses.
Use it as a second scanner if you already have another AV program-- Clamwin is not a resource hog.
Oh yeah -- it's frequently used as an email scanner in networks of all sizes... don't worry about it's virus database!
Their tcpserv product gathers status data from all AVG "clients" on the network, including several hung off a 64kbps leased line - it's conservative on bandwidth. AVG for linux scans samba shares, and soon I will have AVG for sendmail monitoring mail in and out.
The AVGadmin client can be used to view reports, force updates and make configuration changes to all clients from my desktop - I've yet to try running their AVGadmin app under wine...
I'm very pleased with the flexibility offered by AVG network edition for linux/windows sites. I hope Intel doesn't pressure AVG to scrap the linux support.
AVG won't install on Win95, and noticeably slows down anything 600MHz 128Mb. But compared to any Symantec product, it positively flies.
> Hopefully the virus software can be made more efficient as well.
Intel wants software to be more efficient? hahahaha
I had a friend who worked for a startup which Intel was considering investment. They said good, now how can we get it to use more cpu.
Maybe they have changed, but people don't buy new machines unless the old one runs slow.
With a little bit o' work, that fryer oil can run a diesel engine...
500GB of disk, 5TB of transfer, $5.95/mo
Ever heard of memory protection?
This is just another sign that Intel is beginning to grow desperate in the face of AMD's superior CPU architecture.
Can't win in your core competency? Diversify!
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
I'm not even sure how such a hardware anti-virus would work
:)
First hardware support for VB scripts
Then hardware support for preventing executon of VB scripts
AVG doesn't seem to slow down any of my computers. I think it's a great free alternative.
I remember this...
I dumped Trend Micro for AVG (if I remember correctly) over this issue.
I actually pay for my AVG licenses simply because I can afford to and good companies need to be kept alive.
Now strangely I wonder what will come of this. I don't really like doing business with either Intel *or* Microsoft. Though to be fair, Intel is certainly not Microsoft- who in mymind sets the standard for sleeze.
Another consultant who stuck it out.
"We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
your sig:
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
I believe this is the best sig I've seen in many months.
Thank you.
hanzie
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
I would not be surprised if someone in management at Intel tried AVG Free and liked it enough to "buy the company". I would think that the free version would continue to be available.
It's a good product; effective, low resource usage, and updated often. I have found Norton to be a TERRIBLE resource hog. McAfee is a bit better, but buggy (in my opinion).
What I ESPECIALLY like is the reponsiveness of the company itself. Version 6 had a fixed installation location; I believe in installing security software like a firewall, anti-spyware, and virus checkers to non-standard locations to at least help thwart possible attempts to disable them through malware. When I suggested via e-mail that the company change their installer to allow varying the installation location, it was clear they took me seriously -- and, lo-and-behold, version 7 allows the user to do just that.
This is about an Intel Virtual machine, which will wrest the PC away from Microsoft.
I wish I could remember where I read the article ( Register, Inquirer, or Tom's Hardware ), but
Intel is crafting a root kit virtual machine which snatches control from Microsoft.
The first target is a vitual ethernet that performs network security, including antivirus.
Everything else on the PC is also fair game.
With this root kit, Intel makes hardware primary again. No more begging silly Microsoft to clean
up their silly legacy x86 code, which inhibits Intel's plans for massive processor improvements.
Meanwhile, Bill Gates still blames Intel for the 286, and thinks that Intel are just a bunch of
lucky incompetents riding on Microsoft's success.
An Intel root kit will not require Windows software in any way whatsoever. This will free Intel to completely focus on CPU's and chip sets with related drivers. The code can be written in the most optimal manner, favoring the hardware.
It will also, incidently, provide a silent way to patch Intel bugs, should such ever occur.
Intel takes over the hardware plus drivers, and makes Windows into just another application.
All software drivers become Intel Certified instead of Microsoft Certified.
Apple gets a more fair chance, since the PC is now an Intel desktop.
Linux gets software driver support for all the latest hardware, as soon as Microsoft does, by
default.
Very strange. When I search Google for GRISOFT AVG, the very first result I get reads:
AVG Anti Virus: HOME
The complex anti-virus protection for your computer.
Which company would promote its solution as a complex one, especially in the antivirus market?
There's something fishy here... Reminds me of Google bombing.
Maybe some people are upset by the fact that Intel is coming into play.
Sure, the risks are minimal, but virii do occur on those platforms!
No, they dont.
Name 3 widespread in the wild viruses (no, virii is not a word) running on Linux, *BSD or OSX platforms.
You can't, because there never was even one.
If you do a search on the virus databases of antivirus companies they normally have NO signatures for *nix viruses. And when they do, I invite you to read the notes: they are all "proof of concept" lab viruses, and they never infected anything.
A file is created WITHOUT execution permissions, on *nix platforms. How is the virus going to execute and spread, tell me...
Ciao, Renato
> A file is created WITHOUT execution permissions, on *nix platforms. How is the virus going to execute and spread, tell me...
Scripts can be executed without the execute bit.
Besides, the 'virus' (really trojan or worm) author has already exploited one or more holes to get the thing on a system. You really think the lack of an execute bit is going to be an insurmountable obstacle?
The biggest protection *nix has against viruses it's is total unpopularity.
And you guys were wondering why Steve Jobs didn't stick with PowerPCs.
The virus infection is possible because programs are just another form of data which can be written over buy other running processes.
If we could devise a way to treat executables different then other data, on a very low level, to seggregate it into special protected parts of memory and storage and to allow writing to it only with explicit acknowledgement of the user, the problem would be tamed and even more common vulnerabilities would be nonexistent (i.e. stack overflow exploit - code written to the stack would reside in data space and could not get executed).
Scripts, of course, elude this simple protection, but we can embed another layer of protection into common interpreter programs, i.e. warning the user whenever a script tries to write into another script.
The point is, virus spreads because it can change another "live" code without our consent. Remove that capability and it can only ask you to let it, like "cute bunny viral sig" !
Years ago they already had their own antivirus, Landesk Virus Protect, wich was a very good product for corporate networks.
Eventually they sold it around 1998 or 1999 to Symantec, where it became Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition (and now Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition).
No shit, Sherlock?
RST, Adore, Ramen, Slapper.
Most Linux exploits are using some Linux viruses (file infectors, worms, trojans, etc) to spread into the system or to gain control. Just take a look at latest PHP vuln exploits and you'll see that almost all of them are using a variant of RST.A or RST.B to infect other binaries and to install rootkits.
$ /opt/BitDefender/lib/bdc --vlist | grep -i linux | wc -l
526
Uh.. what part of "those are not viruses" don't you understand?
An antivirus would give you 0 protection from a worm, vulnerability or rootkit.
This article is about antivirus. And I reiterate, name 3.
Ciao, Renato
Pick your favourite 3 viruses from this list: http://pastebin.com/357848
This is my last reply, 'cause you are obviously trolling and/or not listening.
Those are NOT viruses. And an antivirus would not protect you from them.
Ciao, Renato
Well, depending on the kind of spyware, many don't actually use security exploits to do their work. They tell you what they're going to do on page 532 of the EULA, and then do it. Perhaps it's slightly gray as Microsoft has no incentive to prevent spyware, but all in all the user is free to put the gun to his own foot.
With anti-virus software, Microsoft is playing both sides of the table. They deliver the problem, and then the solution. I don't think Microsoft wants to move into the traditional anti-virus market simply because of all the flak they'd get about making money off their own security exploits. Perhaps squeeze them out of business by improving security (thus freeing up more of the TCO to pay for the Windows license) but not directly compete.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Microsoft seems to have a good strong competative pattern that they've been doing. I don't know if Intel can compete. Microsoft's pattern is:
1. Create an Operating System
2. Look at what software is successful and making money on that Operating System.
3. Create Microsoft version of same software
4. Integrate said software into the OS and use Windows leverage to force OEM's and manufacturers to bundle preinstalled on most computers.
So far, this has pretty much worked and usually kills whatever piece of software was successful on Windows. I think its about to happen with antivirus software. I dont know if Intel or the other antivirus companies can compete with this. What do you think?
Microsoft has a couple of unique challenges in the AV and spyware markets that they don't have elsewhere...
Microsoft's reputation on the security front is in tatters from their past actions / inaction. Granted, lately they have gotten a lot better but it takes quite a long time to gain that trust back, especially when you're talking about the tin foil hat crowd in computer security communities.
I don't know about you but where I work MS whitelisting some Claria products (the creators of the infamous Gator spyware) in their AntiSpyware product raised a bunch of eyebrows. Whether the whitelisting was justified or not isn't the point of that example. I mention it to point out that people just don't trust Microsoft yet with the security of their enterprise.
Add to the fact that it is probably a good idea to separate your anti-virus and OS vendor and MS has a pretty steep hill to climb.
G. Washington on Government "it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
I've been an authorized AVG reseller for over two years. I was so impressed with the free version that I signed up. Now all of my managed sites run AVG in some form, Network Edition (which is centrally managed) or SoHo Edition. It's light-weight and easy to manage.
Granted, the free edition does do the job, but there are a couple of caveats. Firstly, the licensing says that it MUST be used for private use. Secondly, whenever there is a major virus outbreak the free edition is almost impossible to update as everyone tries. Well, it *is* free after all, so there would have to be limited resources.
The full version gets its updates via Akamai. It's also more flexible with scheduling and management. It also costs less for a two year subscription than most comparable products with ONE year subs. When you renew, you get a major discount, up to 50%. Makes it worth it to me and my customers.
Does anyone even run anti-virus software on their BSD / Linux boxen?
Could this be what is coming next from Intel?
I remember a time when there was some basic antivirus program in the BIOS of my old 486. I think it was called MWAV.
So I guess its possible to do it again, it'll just take a heck of a lot more storage space though.
DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
No, really, they are. A vulnerability in PHP runs the virus, which infects other executables. A virus checker should be able to detect the memory signature and go "Whoah!"
My ASUS PC with an AMD processor has Antivirus built into the hardware. There's even a BIOS setting to enable/disable antivirus. AMD uses DEP.
e /1999/pr062199.htm
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5137832.html
ASUS uses TREND CHIP.
http://www.trendmicro.com/en/about/news/pr/archiv
So I guess Intel is playing catch up? On the marketing, I mean.
Intel HAD an antivirus product. They sold it to Symantec. Take a look at the registry settings for Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition. You can still see the "Intel LANdesk" remnants three major versions after the acquisition.
That's all this is. Intel has never marketed good software and they know it (Except the early Vtune, and the Intel C/Fortran Compiler suite). Even the stuff that comes with their mobo's is crapola. I bet this is solelty to acquire IP rights for future products.
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
I wouldn't worry to mch about microsoft entering the anti-virus market. if they really knew anything at all about protecting against viruses, we wouldn't need so much anti-virus software in the first place.
If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
MS and AV do not go together.
We locked down desktops and took away admin rights for everyone outside of IT. That process blocked 90-95% of malware because it cannot install via "teh cusdumber". What we still saw getting in, was ActiveX, Java, Javascript, and some Windows vulnerabilities that were on laptops that had not been on the LAN to be patched recently.
MS still has a long way to go with security before I will trust them for any AV or anti-spyware softare.
Ummm, Jon, aren't you supposed to be dead...? - Otter(3800)
Intel was here once before. They got tired of having their asshats handed to them....... by McAffee, Norton, etc. and backed away. The op was centered in their now defunct (at least from the perspective of building anything) Utah Valley, Ut operation. It built things like LanDesk Manager, LANDesk Configuration Manager, and (for awhile) LANDesk Anti-Virus. During one of Intel's periodic 90 days of down revenues, they tired of the software business, and laid off ~3000 people, to make Wall Street believe that they were $3B better off than they really were. Circa 1997. It (the Utah Op) was run by Ed Ekstrom, another one of the former Novell crowd (like SCO's Darl McBride) with delusions of grandeur.
;-(, but then it was also quite lucrative ;-). Good luck to the schmucks who will work inside this new subsidiary until the machine tires of software yet again. Get lots of stock options, and never trust a lifer intel manager with your back turned.
Intel, as usual never ceases to amaze those who have been inside. The singularly most poisonous employment environment I have ever seen
Hitting Enter too soon = premature echatulation
Wouldnt worry?? They just bought an antivirus company and are planning to release it with the next version of windows, and you dont think anyone should worry about it?
This is pretty far fetched, but dont you think microsoft would then benefit from viruses and end up looking like heros? As well have further in-depth knowledge about how every virus/worm works with windows, as opposed to the very limited knowledge of current antivirus companies. With their windows leverage, I dont see how they can fail.
They should focus on creating a network card with anti-virus and firewall already integrated in it so everything that comes from outside is automatically screened and cleaned.
Hell cd-rom, floppy drives and all port entry on a computer should have somwehere where every piece of data is scan before even getting on your hard disk or memory.