Should ISPs Cut Off Bot-infected Users?

richi writes "There's no doubt that botnets are a major threat to the safety and stability of the internet — not to mention the cleanliness of your inbox. After years of failure to act, could we finally be seeing ISPs waking up to their responsibilities? While ISPs can't prevent users getting infected with bots, they are in a superb position to detect the signs of infection. Contractually, the ISP would be reasonably justified in cutting off a user from the internet, as bot infection would be contrary to the terms of the ISP's acceptable-use policy."

Comments

No

[santax]

They should not, for the same reason ISP's should not filter ports (25 anyone) like a lot of them are doing now. Also to see if someone has an infection you would have to monitor the traffic. While that can be automated it is none of their business. They just rent an internetpipe to me. How I care for the security of that pipe is up to me. That's what I am paying for. I can see that this would benefit some users and would help make the internet 'safer' but installing a good firewall and virusscanner wil keep you reasonable safe also. And one thing still goes btw... if your system is mission critical... consider if it really has to be on a public network. A lot of times it doesn't have to be.

Re:They could do it nicely

[TheOldFart]

... and the scanner would say: Malicious software found: Windows. Please replace it with anything else... Is it even possible to "clean" a Windows machine? How far behind are these so called "virus scanners"? Specially these freebees?

Re:Cut off vs. filtered

[mcgrew]

It's easy to avoid getting infected.

Easy for you and me, not so easy for Joe Sixpack who, when his kid asks how a computer works, shrugs and says "it's magic". Ten years ago before the internet became mainstream and most people on it were nerds, I would have agreed. But nowadays we're a tiny minority.

When I have friends whose computers slow to a crawl from the infections, I reinstall Windows, install Linux dual-boot and disable networking in Windows. I never have any infection problams after that.

Rather than punishing people for their ignorance, why don't we punish the source of the infectability, Microsoft? Yes, 7 is the best Windows yet, but it's got a long way to go before it's Apple or Linux.

Virus infection is NOT a given

[Zero__Kelvin]

"Would ye two guys still feel the same way if it was YOU who was cutoff, and it turns-out you've an infection you don't know how to get rid of?"

In the scenario you propose the person is ignorant, which is not an insult but rather a word describing someone who doesn't know any better. That person might at first be upset, but then the ISP could offer a very simple solution, to wit stop running a petri dish for an OS and switch to a real OS such as Linux or OS X. The same person that was originally upset would soon be forever thanking me for cutting them off until they stopped being ignorant and became educated to the fact that they actually have a much better alternative at their disposal. This is not speculation, by the way. People thank me all the time for introducing them to other options, as they had no idea that they even had any.

Re:Lets ask in different context

[znerk]

We also provide download links for security software right from our tech support portal, and a complimentary CD with the same software with every new subscriber.

McAfee is not security software. Try again, this time with something that doesn't delete critical Windows system files because it thinks they might be infected. A: Quarantine is a better solution. B: McAfee has *repeatedly* "accidentally" sent out updates with this issue.

Similarly, using MS Live OneCare is not an option for all subscribers.

In other words, unless you're going to come to my house and virus-scan my PC for me every time I ask, you can stay out of my traffic and just carry it like you're paid to.