Slashdot Mirror


Computer Security Still Totally Inadequate

Several news sources are running articles detailing the lack of computer security on all platforms. Symantec foretells a dark future for Firefox and Mac users describing their security as a "false paradise". Kernel developer and Red Hat fellow, Allan Cox stated in his recent interview with O'Reilly that "even the best systems today are totally inadequate". He goes on to say that "We are still in a world where an attack like the Slammer worm, combined with a PC BIOS eraser or disk locking tool, could wipe out half the PCs exposed to the Internet in a few hours," Cox said. "In a sense we are fortunate that most attackers want to control and use systems they attack rather than destroy them."

6 of 452 comments (clear)

  1. Re:"Computer" security? by SFalcon · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nevermind RTFA, did you even read the summary?

    "Symantec foretells a dark future for Firefox and Mac users describing their security as a "false paradise"."

  2. Re:Symantec Security Software by MikeFM · · Score: 4, Informative

    I hate that. I've fixed more people's computers by simply removing these crappy security suites than I ever have needed to fix viruses and hacks. A firewall, reasonable use restrictions (not installing Chinese software cracks), not using IE/Outlook, and running an occasional anti-virus anti-spyware scan are plenty.

    If you need more then switch to Linux.

    --
    At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  3. Opt-In ActiveX is the best IE feature, ever by quazee · · Score: 5, Informative

    This, in fact, should reduce the IE's attack surface several-fold.

    MS has made a huge mistake when IE 4.x-6.x relied on CATID_SafeForScripting/CATID_SafeForInitializing COM component categories to make decisions whether it's safe to use the COM component from a JavaScript/VBScript.

    CATID_SafeForScripting is not needed when the COM component is accessed from a stand-alone .VBS/.JS script stored on the local machine (which is trusted to do anything anyway), yet a lot of MS and third-party components is in CATID_SafeForScripting for no reason at all.

    IE has a kill bit feature which allows disabling certain scriptable COM components based on their GUIDs. And most IE security fixes are, in fact, just registry updates adding more of those "kill bits".

    Examples: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin /fq99-032.mspx
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin /fq99-037.mspx
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin /MS02-055.mspx
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin /MS02-065.mspx
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin /ms02-055.asp
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin /ms03-038.asp
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin /MS03-038.mspx
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/?url=/te chnet/security/bulletin/MS03-038.asp
    ... and many-many-many more of these holes (just search for "kill bit" with the quotes)

    --
    throw new SuccessException("Sig read successfully");
    1. Re:Opt-In ActiveX is the best IE feature, ever by bombadier_beetle · · Score: 3, Informative

      And to make matters worse, IE running on Windows XP SP2 now blocks lots of ActiveX objects whether or not they are in CATID_SafeForScripting... which might be a kind of blanket security, except now an ActiveX object merely has to correctly implement IObjectSafety to get around that. So I suppose Microsoft isn't protecting us from malware writers, they're just protecting us from really lazy ones.

      --

      If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.
  4. Re:I'm delusional by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Informative
    That would be an "umm... no."

    Number of PC viruses in 2004: 30
    Number of Mac viruses ever:26

    Do the math. Oh, and most of the stuff that SAM flagged...

    MS Word macro viruses: 533

    Sources:
    Mac Viruses by the numbers
    30 PC viruses played havoc in 2004

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  5. Rootkit? by imunfair · · Score: 3, Informative

    First I saw them talking about Mac... then I thought well - it's BSD based now, which has been around practically forever.

    Then I saw them mention a root kit for OSX and wondered to myself what good that would do without actually having a way to gain control in the first place.

    (See definition of rootkit from wikipedia: "A root kit is a set of tools used by an intruder after cracking a computer system. These tools can help the attacker maintain his or her access to the system and use it for malicious purposes."

    Note the words "after cracking" and "maintain" ... not "hack into" and "gain")

    Sounds like a bunch of malarky disguised as solid information to scare people who aren't aware of more advanced computer concepts.