German Ministry of Education Throws Away PCs For 190,000 € Due To Infection

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

German Ministry of Education Throws Away PCs For 190,000 € Due To Infection

Posted by Unknown on Monday April 29, 2013 @09:07PM from the burn-it-with-fire dept.

An anonymous reader writes "German IT magazine Heise reports (original in German) that the Ministry of Education in Schwerin had a Conficker virus infection on 170 machines, that was dealt with by simply throwing them on the trash. Other German authorities have now decided that 'the approach taken is not up to the principle of efficiency and economy' and that the 187,300 Euro invested in this radical form of virus removal were inappropriate. The ministry had earlier estimated the cost of cleaning their desktops and servers by more conventional means to 130,000 Euro."

347 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 21:12 · Score: 4, Insightful

Install Linux. Cost $0 + admins' time -- almost certainly less than trying to remove and clean infected systems.
Forget about virus infections for the near future.
1. Re:Far cheaper options by Cenan · 2013-04-29 21:25 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Install Linux. Cost $0 + admins' time -- almost certainly less than trying to remove and clean infected systems.
  Forget about virus infections for the near future.
  They already had licenses to the Windows installations so the cost equation would be the same, it only differs if you assume they would try to clean the infection and not simply install Windows after format c:
  What the [admin's time] factor expands to is another thing, and hardly favors the GNU/Linux approach. If the idiots are dumb enough to throw out new PCs because of a virus infection, they most certainly are too dumb to install anything but Windows.
  
  --
  ... whatever ...
2. Re:Far cheaper options by Pav · 2013-04-29 21:49 · Score: 2
  
  Eh? For imaging use PXE with Partimage, or FAI (if you want a non-imaging solution better suited to non-standardised hardware). With Linux on the server side you can manage Windows AND Linux deployments, plus lots of other stuff (groupware, dns, dhcp, phone, netfiltering, filesharing, kerberos along with HEAPS of other stuff not as relevant to an educational context). If you want a GUI integrating all that just use GOsa or FusionDirectory or any number of other LDAP + service management front-ends. It's not like Germany and europe in general is short of that expertise - I know GOsa and FD are projects based in Germany and Belgium respectively.
3. Re:Far cheaper options by Pav · 2013-04-29 21:51 · Score: 1
  
  OPSI for windows deployments... forgot to mention that. It's also LDAP-integrated, though its own webUI is nice too.
4. Re:Far cheaper options by BasilBrush · 2013-04-29 21:51 · Score: 2
  
  Munich decided to do that in 2003. 10 years later, they're still working on the transition.
5. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:02 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  There a more than 1200 Linux viruses
  Liar. There's something like < 100 viruses of which maybe 5 have ever been seen in the wild...
  ps. I doubt your secretary can tell which OS they're running in the first place. And it's completely irrelevant too since the workflow is the same.
6. Re:Far cheaper options by Nerdfest · 2013-04-29 22:03 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Apparently the Ministry of Education in Schwerin did not, and they're still dealing with the consequences.
7. Re:Far cheaper options by longk · 2013-04-29 22:06 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  It really depends on the situation. Being Germany it's possible that all the average worker needs is SAPGUI, which doesn't really differently on Linux than it does on Windows.
8. Re:Far cheaper options by Drakonblayde · 2013-04-29 22:09 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I'm sure a large part of the decision to toss em in the garbage was because someone wanted new gear. Can't forget about the political element to an IT infrastructure.
9. Re:Far cheaper options by Pav · 2013-04-29 22:17 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Have you seen the work that came out of that? The GUI frontend to it all is called GOsa (although there's a fork called FusionDirectory which I prefer). The whole infrastructure is managed via LDAP plus RPC, and allows deployment of Linux and Windows (via FAI and OPSI respectively). There are also a multitude of plugins for managing a multitude of network services and LDAP stored info. I use it for managing DNS, DHCP, groupware (SOGo), web proxy + filtering (Squid), Samba, windows OS + software deployment (OPSI), Linux + software deployment (FAI), Debian/Ubuntu repo management, centralised logging (rSyslog)... and I'm currently looking into connecting it to Asterisk. There are TONS more plugins.
10. Re:Far cheaper options by JaredOfEuropa · 2013-04-29 22:35 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It's equally crap on both, you mean. SAP's UI is Satan's sick joke on humanity.
  
  --
  If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
11. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:45 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  ps. I doubt your secretary can tell which OS they're running in the first place
  Then you're an idiot. Just because someone doesn't understand technology doesn't mean they don't know when their menu items are in different places or when the nice obvious icon they had becomes some in-joke about Klingons.
12. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:51 · Score: 0
  
  There a more than 1200 Linux viruses. That notion of yours is bullshit.
  And you are forgetting costs to teach your average secretary how to use Linux + New Software licenses + migration costs.
  You must be a teenager in Mom's basement if you think for a second that large scale environments can be migrated to Linux for free and everyone know how to use it. Bollocks.
  Supported Linux like Red Hat actually costs money.
  Please. Don't make today's office worker needs seem so damn dramatic. With the "cloud" emerging, the average user won't need to know much more than how to use a browser anyway (or whatever Facebook deems appropriate for business by then). They're already tuned to the idea of "apps" being downloaded and installed in seconds from a centralized store.
  And that teenager in Mom's basement is now your secretary.
13. Re:Far cheaper options by Ash+Vince · 2013-04-29 23:29 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Install Linux. Cost $0 + admins' time -- almost certainly less than trying to remove and clean infected systems.
  Forget about virus infections for the near future.
  Of course the admins time probably adds up to about $300 per machine.
  Seriously, I can completely believe this story because it would probably take someone at least an hour to clean the PC. It is also quite easy to believe that a government department or big company who outsourced their IT would be paying more per hour for technical staff than they would for a new PC.
  This is especially true if you asked the IT outsourcing company to provide a cast iron assurance that the virus was removed with some sort of penalty clause if their was a reinfection. The quote you would get back would be prohibitively expensive because the any company with any sense would run a mile from providing such a ridiculous guarantee.
  All of sudden what sounds like a 5 minute job to someone with some technical skills and has a 99% success rate has become such a headache to the bean counters that demanded a 100% success rate that they decide throwing the machines in the bin is actually cheaper. Of course this is ridiculous, but I have heard of things far more ridiculous when government middle management gets involved in IT decisions.
  In public sector management you hardly ever get rewarded for things coming in under budget like you do in the private sector but you get torn to shreds if anything ever goes wrong so the whole thing ends up being ridiculously risk averse in the extreme.
  
  --
  I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
14. Re:Far cheaper options by AmiMoJo · 2013-04-29 23:29 · Score: 2
  
  Depends how you count. Do you include worms that target software like Apache or SQL servers? Most people count worms that target the Windows Server equivalents as Windows viruses.
  1200 is still high but there are plenty of viruses that affect Linux systems, even if they are not targeting the OS itself.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
15. Re:Far cheaper options by RabidReindeer · 2013-04-29 23:31 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  ps. I doubt your secretary can tell which OS they're running in the first place
  Then you're an idiot. Just because someone doesn't understand technology doesn't mean they don't know when their menu items are in different places or when the nice obvious icon they had becomes some in-joke about Klingons.
  secretary: OK. so what do you mean that "this new ribbon bar is all you need"? Where'd my "print" menu go???
16. Re: Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:37 · Score: 0
  
  It was the only way to be sure.
17. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:44 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  Good luck finding a new maintainer for this cobbled together mess once you've left.
18. Re:Far cheaper options by e70838 · 2013-04-29 23:47 · Score: 2
  
  According to my personal guinea pig, migration from windows to linux is easier than adoption of windows 8.
19. Re:Far cheaper options by randomErr · 2013-04-30 00:00 · Score: 1
  
  Weird thought: If you're going to take the time put Linux on the machine why not just get a clean image of Windows and re-image each drive. Just make a boot CD and image old drives.
  
  --
  You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
20. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:06 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, good option. Then, pay people to rewrite your applications so that they run under the flavor of GNU/Linux you have chosen. Oops, there went your 190,000 Euros (and a whole lot more). Or did you think that these people only use what comes with the OS and what is in "apt-get"? Remember, relatively nobody runs Linux so there isn't exactly a thriving marketplace for the same business apps that run today on Windows. Especially for those in-house line of business applications.
21. Re:Far cheaper options by Henriok · 2013-04-30 00:08 · Score: 1
  
  Install Linux. Cost $0 + admins' time -- almost certainly less than trying to remove and clean infected systems.
  + cost of education of the IT staff
  + cost of education of the users
  + cost of reduced productivity for the users and the IT staff until their competence rises to the before level.
  Since they already had licenses for Windows, it'll cost nothing but time to re-install Windows. In that scenario, education of the users is zero, and there will be hardly no production loss for the users. There should be some money left to educate the IT staff to handle mitigate the virus threat on their chosen platform.
  
  --
  
  - Henrik
  
  - when the Shadows descend -
22. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:34 · Score: 0
  
  Liar. There are no linux viruses. worms are NOT viruses. a virus is an executable which infects other executables without under interaction. a worm is interpreted code which exploits a vulnerability to propagate itself. executable != interpreted. Please desist from spreading disinformation.
23. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:39 · Score: 1
  
  First, i'm an advocate for linux. I keep trying to get my kids to move off windows and onto ubuntu (ok, at least its easy to use).
  But he is right, you have grossly underestimated the complexity involved. There needs to be an infrastructure in place before you can do the migration as well as training for things to go smoothly.
24. Re:Far cheaper options by mikes.song · 2013-04-30 01:05 · Score: 1
  
  Don't attribute to negligence what is so obviously fraud.
25. Re:Far cheaper options by tepples · 2013-04-30 01:13 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  How many of your claimed costs of education and of reduced productivity would be any different on, say, Windows 8?
26. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:13 · Score: 0
  
  Apparently the Ministry of Education in Schwerin did not, and they're still dealing with the consequences.
  The consequence being a) having working computers, and b) the comptroller complaining.
27. Re:Far cheaper options by moronoxyd · 2013-04-30 01:13 · Score: 1
  
  Do you make the same distinction when talking about Windows malware?
  I doubt it.
  Most people say 'virus' and mean 'any malware like viri, trojans, worms et. al.'.
28. Re:Far cheaper options by omnichad · 2013-04-30 01:16 · Score: 1
  
  Cost $0 + admins' time
  The cost of fixing the problem was already $0 + admins' time. Unless you're not very bright and just throw out the machines.
29. Re:Far cheaper options by mmcxii · 2013-04-30 01:19 · Score: 2
  
  You may laugh but for as much as most AAs can't tell you a mainframe from a stick of RAM they certainly do know their way around the software that they've been using for over a decade. So as much as some of us like to pat ourselves on the back for being nerds and geeks, these people can make your head spin when it comes down to using your basic office suite apps. This isn't to say that they couldn't be retrained for another office suite but there would be training involved and their productivity would suffer from it for a while.
30. Re:Far cheaper options by omnichad · 2013-04-30 01:19 · Score: 0
  
  Insightful though this is, the new print menu is one of the nicer things about the new interface.
31. Re:Far cheaper options by L4t3r4lu5 · 2013-04-30 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  Twist: Managing GUI plugins can only be done from the command line.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
32. Re:Far cheaper options by omnichad · 2013-04-30 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  I think it's fair to call all self-propagating malware a virus. Especially since an executable blindly infecting other executables just isn't common anymore.
33. Re:Far cheaper options by omnichad · 2013-04-30 01:28 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Why would you sit and stare at a computer while running virus removal tools. Move on to the next computer. This is a very common virus with pre-made tools available to remove it from several vendors. Just start it running on 100 computers at a time - just as fast as you can run and type.
  All you have to do is get one computer fixed reliably. Then just make sure you do the same thing to the others. It's not like you have hundreds of totally unique infections.
34. Re:Far cheaper options by Runaway1956 · 2013-04-30 01:28 · Score: 1
  
  Nonsense. Nuke from orbit, install Linux, and when the grunts come in, blame THEM for screwing up the machines. "Miss Marvel, what do you MEAN you can't find those reports? Didn't you save them to the server? Get on the server, and FIND THEM! No, no! Don't go crying at me - just get the job done!"
  "Jenkins, I need the estimates for the gymnasium equipment ASAP. What do you mean your computer is different? Have you got a pornographic desktop AGAIN? No? So you got rid of that? Alright - get those estimates, I have a meeting with the School Board at ten o'clock! Don't make me come down there!"
  Let the grunts figure it out. It's EDUCATION system, right? Let them act educated, or let them go home.
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
35. Re:Far cheaper options by Runaway1956 · 2013-04-30 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  One of the neighbor kids is looking for a job right now. The boy ain't real bright in a lot of ways, but he knows his way around Linux. Let's put him on as a temp, if he works out, we can consider making him full time for ten dollars an hour. Yeah, he'll help Miss Klamath and Joe Bungler to figure out how to use all those cool new applications. Heck, the FBI has come around asking about him - he must be good!
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
36. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:34 · Score: 0
  
  Additional cost 2 billion marks in baby sitting the so called 'professional clerical workers' ie council workers in using the new system.
  Plus one moe billion sending all the chief execs to play golf somewhere exotic while they lean it too or their secretary (m/f) does too.
37. Re:Far cheaper options by Runaway1956 · 2013-04-30 01:40 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  1200 viruses? I think you're exaggerating. Maybe you're counting some variants of the same "virus" - like several times each. I don't know the exact number, to be honest. I do know that I was repairing damage due to exploits on Windows monthly. When I switched to Linux, I stopped repairing computers, until hardware broke.
  How many millions of viruses are available for Windows now? So few virus writers support Linux . . . *sigh*
  Here's a number that will blow your mind:
  "At day’s end on April 12, for example, Symantec published the summary shown below, noting that its latest Virus Definitions file contained 17,702,868 separate signatures."
  Don't take my word for it - read the article!
  http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/the-malware-numbers-game-how-many-viruses-are-out-there/4783
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
38. Re:Far cheaper options by walterbyrd · 2013-04-30 01:40 · Score: 2
  
  > There a more than 1200 Linux viruses. That notion of yours is bullshit.
  I have ran Linux as my primary desktop for over ten years, never run an anti-virus, never got infected.
  > And you are forgetting costs to teach your average secretary how to use Linux + New Software licenses + migration costs.
  Are you forgetting how radically different Win8 is from previous versions of windows? And, unlike iTunes or other proprietary garbage, there is no 79 page license you have to sign for Linux. As to migration costs, much of your old software will not run on Win8.
  > You must be a teenager in Mom's basement if you think for a second that large scale environments can be migrated to Linux for free and everyone know how to use it. Bollocks.
  I am not. I realize there are difficulties in switching from one environment to another. But sometimes it's worth it.
  > Supported Linux like Red Hat actually costs money.
  So don't use Red Hat. Lots of free linux distros out there.
39. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:42 · Score: 0
  
  I think it's fair to call all self-propagating malware a virus.
  Just as fair as calling all hardware "the hard drive", and anything on wheels a Corvette?
40. Re:Far cheaper options by amiga3D · 2013-04-30 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not going to argue about the linux issue but what I don't get is why they can't simply reload the operating system? Is it that expensive to reinstall an OS that you've already paid for? I've installed windows and it's not that much harder than installing linux. I had to hunt down the drivers for the system on the manufacturer's website but that was about it and it rebooted several times then it was there. 130,000 euros for that?
41. Re:Far cheaper options by amiga3D · 2013-04-30 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  cleanmyPC.com
  Sorry, could not resist.
42. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:45 · Score: 0
  
  I guess it all depends on what their job is. WYSISWYG interfaces make using Office or LibreOffice/OpenOffice easy. The majority of users don't really use those applications to their full extend, or to the point where switching is a major factor in their productivity.
  It's interesting that Windows advocates have, for the longest time, talked about the familiarity of the Windows idiom being key to productivity. Well, that argument was blown away with WIndows 8, except that now Windows advocates are saying that retraining isn't a big deal.
  My opinion is that anyone can learn any interface and if they're familiar with using a computer, not just applications, they'll be fine.
  As to the article, a 130,000 Euro to remove viruses and, assuming the cost is similar to the original investment, only 187,000 Euro to replace the PCs themselves? I don't disagree with Shwerin's call. The difference is about 50K Euro and you get new PCs with new antivirus software. UNless the PCs are running Windows 7 (at least), you're looking at an upgrade soon anyway. It just "looks" wasteful.
43. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:48 · Score: 0
  
  This is not the land of "most people" this, is, /.!
44. Re:Far cheaper options by mark-t · 2013-04-30 01:49 · Score: 1
  
  5 have been in the wild, hmm?
  I'm curious... which ones?
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
45. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:50 · Score: 2
  
  Holy Stockholm syndrome.
46. Re:Far cheaper options by jellomizer · 2013-04-30 01:51 · Score: 1
  
  The systems may have already have windows license, so you can Install Windows so it still cost $0 + admin time.
  The real issue is that they didn't have an appropriate administration of those systems where they could have cleaned them remotely.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
47. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:56 · Score: 0
  
  If the idiots are dumb enough to throw out new PCs because of a virus infection, they most certainly are too dumb to install anything but Windows.
  It's clear you've never installed those two OSes before, I have. Installing neither is hard, but installing Linux is far easier and takes 1/10th the time installing Windows does. With a good Linux distro you'll answer a few basic questions and let it do its thing. You have to babysit a Windows installation, then you have to install software -- which is unnecessary with Linux, because the software gets installed with the OS.
  Also, you question their intelligence, I don't, I question their ethics. Do a lot of work or spend someone else's money? To a lazy unethical man, the second option is far more intelligent.
48. Re:Far cheaper options by mark-t · 2013-04-30 01:58 · Score: 1
  
  I won't deny the fact that there are some applications for which no functional equivalent exists on Linux at all, but the number of them is not really very high Which applications are you thinking that they use which don't have a functional equivalent for Linux?
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
49. Re:Far cheaper options by slashmydots · 2013-04-30 01:59 · Score: 1
  
  You forgot run 5% of your software that you were running before
50. Re:Far cheaper options by Reschekle · 2013-04-30 02:10 · Score: 1
  
  This post shouldn't have been modded down. It is a valid argument. There are tons of business apps out there that won't run on Linux. Just because Linux has an OSS equivalent of something doesn't mean it is also equivalent in quality, support, or familiarity to the users who already have years of training invested in a particular tool.
  There are some offices where Linux, one of the free office suites, and some of the various free apps out there would be adequate for the required workflow, and we do hear about those companies and governments when they switch to Linux.
  However, to blindly proclaim that Linux is a drop-in replacement for Windows that will start saving you money immediately is quite ridiculous. If this was *really* the case then businesses would already be doing it en masse.
51. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:17 · Score: 0
  
  Windows 8 does suck hard, but it is not radically different from previous versions of Windows, and all of your old apps from XP/Vista/7 will run on Windows 8. It is just an evolution of the Windows product line, not a radical departure from it. Linux is not "like" Windows except in a vague way in that they both offer a GUI with icons that you can click on.
  I find it funny that you dispute him by referring to his arguments as "claims", as if there is a credible dispute here. You've clearly never worked with end-users before or have been involved in enterprise IT.
  I think Linux could replace Windows in many environments, but it would fail hard in much of the corporate world. It may get to a point where Linux becomes a credible competitor in this space, and I'd be more than happy to embrace it, but it's just not there yet and my love for Linux in the server world doesn't blind me to the fact that it isn't the right tool for the job on the user's desktop.
52. Re:Far cheaper options by bigredradio · 2013-04-30 02:24 · Score: 1
  
  Ballmer... is that you?
  
  --
  Flexible bare-metal recovery for Linux/UNIX
53. Re:Far cheaper options by ktappe · 2013-04-30 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  secretary: OK. so what do you mean that "this new ribbon bar is all you need"? Where'd my "print" menu go???
  They have to ask that every time a new version of MS Office comes out anyway.
  
  --
  "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
54. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  Holy Stockholm syndrome.
  How do you mean? First, you click File, Print (it is kind of funny to see Slashdotters talking about this being so difficult to find). Then up comes a print menu with instant preview of what you are about to print, and the most common print options. What specifically about that print menu get you to joke about Stockholm syndrome?
55. Re:Far cheaper options by onyxruby · 2013-04-30 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  Admin time always exceeds the cost of the computer, your a fool if you think the cost of the computer is the main cost of owning it. Your also forgetting the costs of training your users, decreased productivity during the learning curve, the costs of transitioning legacy system (unless your really lucky and they only used Office) as well as the impact to business from interoperability issues with partners. You also have licensing costs for new systems (just because it's Linux doesn't mean it's free - especially for business software) as well as the time to set up everything up. All of this assumes that you have don't have any requirements for Windows for a special application and /can/ do your transition.
  Factor all of your costs together and you quickly exceed the costs of the licenses for Microsoft and similar vendors. If it was cost effective for businesses to transition from the Microsoft platform to Linux for desktops businesses would do it in a heartbeat. With very rare exception business has no loyalty to Microsoft, they are loyal only to the most cost effective way to do something. There are very good reasons why businesses that happily run Linux on as many servers as possible still run Microsoft for their desktop fleets. It is painfully obvious you have never actually had to work with something like this and are speaking out of your ass.
56. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:51 · Score: 0
  
  "Why would you sit and stare at a computer while running virus removal tools."
  Because they might be in a union and being paid by the hour?
57. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:52 · Score: 0
  
  Since they decided to throw away the machines instead of reinstalling Windows, they were obvoiusly too dumb to install Windows too. Probably they should not use PCs at all in the first place.
58. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:54 · Score: 0
  
  and you will have to do it anyway when microsoft decides to screw the pooch.
  Better to just get it over with and do the switch now while you still can.
59. Re:Far cheaper options by contrapunctus · 2013-04-30 03:00 · Score: 1
  
  or, wait for it, control-p
60. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 03:00 · Score: 0
  
  As a computer recycler and seller, I can have 170 PCs catalogued (~1 1/2 days), 3 pass wiped (~ 2 days for 170 machines using a 40 machine setup @ 2 wipe cycles in an 8 hour day) and palletised for sale within 3-4 days. Being barely used, modern machines they'd sell in a flash, and the government would have recouped a portion of their costs in the process.
  Throwing them out is a crime.
61. Re:Far cheaper options by Dishevel · 2013-04-30 03:02 · Score: 2
  
  So don't use Red Hat. Lots of free linux distros out there.
  Or do use Red Hat as it will still be cheaper.
  If Windows were free I would still prefer Linux, just for the licensing.
  All the different licensing takes up my time. Quite a bit of it.
  With the crap I have to go through for viruses, licensing, updating, and basic windows problems I spend a lot of time that I would not have to with linux.
  I have 3 Linux servers, 2 SCO Unix Servers, 2 Windows 2008 servers, 1 Windows 2003 Server, 34 Windows XP machines, 2 Vista Machines, 1 Windows 7 Machine, 1 Ubuntu PC and 4 Linux Mint PCs.
  I know where my time is spent. I can tell you this. Migration on all but one of the XP machines is going straight to Mint. That one is running proprietary software and hardware and is only on the local network and behind a firewall with very strict rules. People will bitch a little. I have already moved a majority of the people off MS Office and onto either Libre Office or Open Office. I installed both and allowed the users to choose which one they like best. Most of them were good after 10 minutes of training on the basic differences. The power users are still on MS Office but I will win them over soon as well.
  Now if I could only get rid of those soul sucking SCO 5 Unix machines my life would be soo much better.
  
  --
  Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
62. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 03:25 · Score: 0
  
  There a more than 1200 Linux viruses.
  Only if you use the same bullshit counting method that distros use to count their app repository.
63. Re:Far cheaper options by RabidReindeer · 2013-04-30 03:30 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  or, wait for it, control-p
  Actually, that's what infuriated me about Office 2008. It removed "unused" items from the File menu, and Control-P wouldn't work reliably.
64. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 03:35 · Score: 0
  
  I make the distinction in all contexts. Technical terms are useful because they have a precise, unchanging definition. Misuse reduces their value by increasing their ambiguity, for no gain. If there was some clever reason I might grudgingly accede, but that is not the case here.
  If you want a generic term, then use something like 'malware'. Even that is not particularly descriptive, as it describes not the nature of the software, but the presumed intent of its author. Whereas the original virii were made for exploration, vandalism, or showing off, now most are made to support fraud, spying, etc. so not precisely 'malicious'.
65. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 03:37 · Score: 0
  
  FDISK
  Format C:
  put Linux install disk in PC
  boot
  Answer half a dozen questions. And actually you could get by without the first two steps.
  $300 for five minutes work? Man, I want a job there!
66. Re:Far cheaper options by war4peace · 2013-04-30 03:41 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  all of your old apps from XP/Vista/7 will run on Windows 8.
  Are you sure?
  Yeah, many do run, but at what cost. There's a plethora of software which can't integrate at all with the Metro (or whatever it's called) functionality. Amazingly, in the tiled UI you can't even read what time it is, only the date. If you want to use Yahoo Messenger, you have to drop to Desktop mode. Daemon Tools? Desktop mode. Avast antivirus? Yeah, Desktop mode. Chrome, Firefox, Opera? Ever-the-fucking-desktop-mode! This is valid for a vast majority of existing (and popular!) Windows applications. And it's been what, 6+ months since Windows 8 got live and most popular application makers have no plans to create tiled apps for Windows 8. So much for 100% compatibility.
  Just as I hate having to use terminal on a Desktop Linux OS, I also hate having to drop to Desktop mode 10 times an hour to do the stuff I usually do. That makes the tiled side of Windows, no matter how colorful, useless and annoying. You switch to Desktop mode to use your browser, then back to Tiled mode to look for a setting, then back to Desktop mode to do this, then back to Tiled mode to check weather, then back... for fuck's sake. It's an OS with two GUIs. RE-TAR-DED.
  
  It is just an evolution of the Windows product line, not a radical departure from it.
  It is a half-baked piece of shit, and that comes from someone who used Windows since... well, 3.1 and tried hard to use Windows 8.
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
67. Re:Far cheaper options by serviscope_minor · 2013-04-30 04:03 · Score: 1
  
  Munich decided to do that in 2003. 10 years later, they're still working on the transition.
  And many organisations are still stuck on Windows XP with apparently no plan or ability to switch in the near future despite EOL gone flying by and EOS approaching rapidly.
  So what's your point other than that a massive infrastructure change is hard?
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
68. Re:Far cheaper options by serviscope_minor · 2013-04-30 04:12 · Score: 1
  
  It's equally crap on both, you mean. SAP's UI is Satan's sick joke on humanity.
  I thought the main purpose of SAP was to provide Oracle's "solutions" with competition in the business space of "most poorly written software it's possible to spend very large amounts of money on".
  Apparently there is a lot of money to be made in that space (who knew) but sadly you have no credibility for writing bad software until you can charge $10,000,000 and put 100 miscommunicating, ill qualified, badly paid and unmotivated solutions architects on the problem.
  Sadly the little guy can't compete with quality like that.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
69. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 04:15 · Score: 0
  
  It's not like you have hundreds of totally unique infections.
  You don't know that.
  Protip: Stay away from the IT industry.
70. Re:Far cheaper options by serviscope_minor · 2013-04-30 04:16 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  I have ran Linux as my primary desktop for over ten years, never run an anti-virus, never got infected.
  Me too in fact BUY VIAGRA the general lack of software MAKE MONEY FROM HOME designed to wrest control FREE CAILIS of my computer and place it into the hands of CHEAP PRESCRIPTION DRUGS spammers and other con artists is GAMBLE ONLINE NOW a real boon.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
71. Re:Far cheaper options by BasilBrush · 2013-04-30 04:17 · Score: 2
  
  And many organisations are still stuck on Windows XP with apparently no plan or ability to switch in the near future despite EOL gone flying by and EOS approaching rapidly.
  But this is like an organisation that decided to transition to WinXP when it was new, and are still in the process.
  
  So what's your point other than that a massive infrastructure change is hard?
  There needs to be a point besides that very important one? People paint switching to Linux as if it's an easy option. It's not, it's and incredibly long and frustrating process. And most people will would wish they never started.
72. Re:Far cheaper options by onyxruby · 2013-04-30 04:28 · Score: 1
  
  The problem with that is that they are almost all variants of the same set of core viruses. Remember that it is in Symantec's interest to make it sound like the situation is dire as possible. I would imagine that if you got rid of the minor variants you would probably have under 100 viruses for Windows as well. Actual new viruses that are not simply variants of a existing virus are fairly rare.
  Most windows viruses are created by taking an existing virus and editing it just slightly to avoid one of the existing signatures matching to it. Every time that happens your virus companies claim that their is a new virus, it really all boils down to marketing hype.
73. Re:Far cheaper options by CannonballHead · 2013-04-30 04:37 · Score: 2
  
  Why would you sit and stare at a computer while running virus removal tools.
  Because they are paid by hour, duh. ;)
74. Re:Far cheaper options by theexaptation · 2013-04-30 04:39 · Score: 1
  
  You could just make an image and deploy it using MDT2010 and WDS (to PXE boot the installer) and could image the whole lot of them in a day after a weeks worth of prep.
75. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 04:50 · Score: 0
  
  You may laugh but for as much as most AAs can't tell you a mainframe...
  AA == Administrative Assistant == Secretary. This is Slashdot. Why are you trying to be politically correct?
76. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 04:59 · Score: 0
  
  You sit and stare because that's what the contract specifies and pays for. Yes, I have seen IT professionals do that. I've asked them about it and they said back when they were paid on salary and employed directly by the company, they of course were required to get multiple machines done at the same time.
  Once they took on an IT contract based job, that changed. The contract company is paid per computer and they damn well won't have their employees doing anything more than one at a time lest the buyer discover they could get a bulk discount.
  Next time an idiot manager suggests outsourcing IT to save money tell them that story. Because it's true.
77. Re:Far cheaper options by number17 · 2013-04-30 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  There's a plethora of software which can't integrate at all with the Metro
  
  Is there a piece of software which works on Window 7 but won't work on Windows 8? SAS 9.3 is currently the only one I know of and it has nothing to do with the start screen or Windows 8 apps. If the application is not a "Metro App" then it will create a shortcut do the desktop version. Whats not to get?
  
  How did you ever manage to tell the difference between a spreadsheet and a word processor? Or do they just freak you out?
78. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 05:06 · Score: 0
  
  Conficker hasn't been a problem since Windows XP - these machines are running an outdated operating system. It would make more sense to get them off a legacy operating system for additional security. This means not only do we need IT time, we also need new licenses. Costs, costs, more costs.
  Alternative: Toss the machine, get an ultra low-power SFF PC with a brand new copy of Windows 8. Burn less power, get new hardware, save more space.
  I'd be a little concerned if they scrapped the monitors, keyboards and mice though.
79. Re:Far cheaper options by Runaway1956 · 2013-04-30 05:13 · Score: 2
  
  You already knew that - but did you read the article? That was my challenge to AC - those millions of Windows viruses can be reduced by an order of magnitude. Ditto for his claim of 1200 Linux claims. ;^)
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
80. Re:Far cheaper options by KingMotley · 2013-04-30 05:18 · Score: 1
  
  > I have ran Linux as my primary desktop for over ten years, never run an anti-virus, never got infected.
  I have run Windows as my primary desktop for over 20 years, never run an anti-virus, never got infected.
  > Are you forgetting how radically different Win8 is from previous versions of windows? And, unlike iTunes or other proprietary garbage, there is no 79 page license you have to sign for Linux. As to migration costs, much of your old software will not run on Win8.
  Radically different? Seriously, put down the cool aid. Any Windows user can be moved to Win8 with about 30 seconds of training. Less if you install one of the Windows start menu programs, after which, most wouldn't be able to tell the difference other than the machine is "faster".
  >I am not. I realize there are difficulties in switching from one environment to another. But sometimes it's worth it.
  Yes, sometimes.
81. Re:Far cheaper options by Dr.+Evil · 2013-04-30 05:22 · Score: 1
  
  "Liar" means something too, and I'm not sure it means what you think it means.
  ... And worms have nothing to do with whether or not the code is interpreted or compiled.
82. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 05:27 · Score: 0
  
  There are no native Linux SAPGUI, most dev efforts have always been spent in SAPWINGUI.
83. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 05:30 · Score: 0
  
  I've been doing Linux admin for just shy of a decade. If the challenge is to set it up and install Linux native stuff - make it $75 / machine. I'll claim that I need about 2 1/2 months, plan on being done in about 1 month. Spend about 3 weeks getting the first machine configured exactly right and documented, then another 1 - 2 prepping autodeployment tools, and when I'm done any new machines should take even a jr admin no more than an hour to fully integrate.
  To be clear I'm overengineering and overcharging - if there are admins doing the same work and getting $300 / box please let me know, I'd love to either join their team or eat their lunch.
84. Re:Far cheaper options by xlsior · 2013-04-30 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  never run an anti-virus, never got infected
  
  That you know of.
  
  Ignorance is bliss.
85. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 05:37 · Score: 0
  
  And teach children how to use Linux, then they can become douchbags and trawl the internet.
86. Re:Far cheaper options by serviscope_minor · 2013-04-30 05:41 · Score: 2
  
  But this is like an organisation that decided to transition to WinXP when it was new, and are still in the process.
  Well, no.
  XP debuted in 2001. Munich didn't even start discussing it until 2003. Votes were passed in mid 2004, and shortly after the project was halted for non technical reasons. They started planning in 2005 and then did a pilot test to see if it was worthwhile and feasible.
  The actual migration started in 2006, the same year as Vista came out, at which point the migration started piecemeal at a few thousand PCs per year. Also, note that half of the migration (switching most PCs to openoffice, firefox and thunderbird which was where a large part of the difficulty lay) was completely finished in two and a half years. The entire process is now nearly complete (13,000 out of 14,000) and has saved apparently EUR 10e6.
  So it's exactly like your example in that it's completely unlike it.
  It's not, it's and incredibly long and frustrating process.
  But you're painting it as if de-facto Windows is an easier option. The fact that so many people are stuck on XP despite being out of all but the last tenuous reaches of extended support indicates that switching in general is hard.
  People are still using IE6 because switching is hard.
  Once you have Windows XP embedded in your organisation, it is very, very hard to get rid of. Microsoft were so good at vendor lockin (see IE6) that they actually managed to shoot themselves in the foot and so successfully locked people into XP and IE6 that they've had hell's own job getting people to upgrade.
  And most people will would wish they never started.
  The example you picked was the LiMux transition. They've saved an estimated EUR 10e6 so far. If that's wishing you never started, then you have a very peculiar set of standards.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
87. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 05:44 · Score: 0
  
  Virus removal tools are not 100% fail safe. I have seen viruses that appear to be removed returning again and again.... The smart thing to do is rebuild/patch, Install security software and remove end user admin rights.
88. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 05:50 · Score: 0
  
  If you had read the article you would have noticed his point that there are only a couple hundred actual viruses covered in there. The millions of signatures that you are pointing out are actually trying to identify the same infections that use polymorphism to hide themselves.
89. Re: Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 06:00 · Score: 0
  
  The article doesn't indicate how old the original junked equipment was so perhaps that was a motivating factor, idk. On the surface though it does seem like it was a decision primarily motivated from laziness and stupidity.
90. Re:Far cheaper options by stenvar · 2013-04-30 06:10 · Score: 1
  
  And you are forgetting costs to teach your average secretary how to use Linux + New Software licenses + migration costs.
  To the "average secretary" or business drone, Windows is a complete mystery, and Windows 8 is a jarring change. Moving them onto a Linux desktop actually means they end up having an easier time (because Linux UIs are simpler and cleaner than Windows these days), and they will even feel more familiar with the UI.
91. Re:Far cheaper options by painandgreed · 2013-04-30 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  ...never run an anti-virus, never got infected.
  How would you even know?
92. Re:Far cheaper options by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2013-04-30 07:19 · Score: 1
  
  Good luck finding a new maintainer for this cobbled together mess once you've left.
  You'd replace it by the alternative cobbled-together mess by Microsoft? Since 1980's there hasn't been a system that isn't a cobbled-together mess. I believe it's called "postmodern software".
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
93. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 07:21 · Score: 0
  
  Now they waste the same amount of admin time on setting up new machines. AND they lost some old data (or add some more admin time).
  Reinstalling Windows or any other operating system is the easy part and if you have identical hardware and you are not an idiot, you can make it in 10 minutes or so when cloning to disk from thumbdrive.
  Maybe the just are corrupted and the company who utilizes the old computers is somehow related to the decision makers. It is that stupid.
94. Re:Far cheaper options by war4peace · 2013-04-30 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  Are you too think to understand?
  I didn't say "it doesn't work", I said "can't integrate at all with Metro". I even gave examples.
  When I install Yahoo Messenger I want it to act just like the Windows Live Messenger, which shows as a nice tile and allows you to do stuff without dropping to Desktop mode all the time.
  It's sad, really, that I have to explain it again and again, with different words, so that the less intelligent can get the idea.
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
95. Re:Far cheaper options by Darinbob · 2013-04-30 09:07 · Score: 2
  
  Or just reimage the machines from scratch.
  Or sell the machines, there are bound to be organizations willing to buy them, reimage them, then resell or use.
  Trashing them is just idiotic.
96. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 09:57 · Score: 0
  
  these people can make your head spin when it comes down to using your basic office suite apps
  By this you mean "are able to do the same steps they do each day, as long as nobody changes them", right?
  I can't count the number of admin assistants, payable people and accountants that I have had to support that can only perform their duties by rote -- if you take away the one path they know how to do a task (or, far more likely, the steps they have on a post-it note stuck to their monitor), they become useless and won't even bother to try and figure it out but instead just whine about how it's not the same and how something changed.
97. Re:Far cheaper options by LostMyBeaver · 2013-04-30 17:01 · Score: 1
  
  Cool! You found a way to remove that last burden of free software which is free IT services. I'm guessing you're volunteering to work for free and install Linux and train all the users and support them over the long term all for free?
  
  AWESOME!
98. Re:Far cheaper options by readingaccount · 2013-04-30 17:46 · Score: 1
  
  I doubt it. 2007 was the one that introduced the ribbon; 2010 and 2013 have different colors but looks very, very similar overall to 2007 (particularly placement of buttons in the ribbon). 2010 introduced a File tab to replace the Office "orb" that apparently confused so many people, so that would have made things even easier I think.
99. Re:Far cheaper options by jobdrb · 2013-04-30 18:02 · Score: 1
  
  Funny, In which planet theses decisions are made based in pure Logic?
  First, Windows are good for People and Companies that did support.
  These people influence theirs users, they really did FUD.
  I found many of that people working in Public and Private environment.
  For example, I work in a public University in Brazil, some years ago I migrate all Office PC of my Department to Linux.
  Result: Fall support calls. No Need to new Machines. Fast Machines.
  
  Many departments after recurring problems with theirs machines,
  (slowing, go to reinstal, return to work, get slow, go to reinstal),
  start to thinking that they need a new machine.
  
  They bought and left machines like Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM,
  which I get to my Department. Only in these month I got 4 PC.
  Theres tens going to the trash that are perfect to work.
  Sometimes when I go to another Department to get a PC left to go, I express my concerns
  and show how fast are the computer that they throwing by using a USB with Linux.
  Then I suggest to migrate. All that I migrate are totally satisfied.
  
  Then you could ask, why there is not a large migration ?
  Simple answer: Laziness of some IT people and their managers.
100. Re:Far cheaper options by Ash+Vince · 2013-04-30 23:52 · Score: 1
  
  Or just reimage the machines from scratch.
  Or sell the machines, there are bound to be organizations willing to buy them, reimage them, then resell or use.
  Trashing them is just idiotic.
  They probably asked how much it would cost to securely remove all data from the hard disks with the same 100% cast iron guarantee and got a similar quote back from their outsourced IT as they did for cleaning the viruses off them.
  As to reimaging the machines that is the sort of magic that only a techie would know about, not the clueless public servant middle manager who was tasked with the project.
  Also, he would get the blame when one of the machines had a perfectly normal hardware failure in a year or so. If he buys he new machine he does not get blamed when it breaks in a similar time frame.
  Of course none of this makes any sense whatsoever, it is a government job, it is not supposed to. That was my point. Anyone who doesn't understand should try watching the film Brasil.
  
  --
  I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
101. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-05-01 02:34 · Score: 0
  
  Better yet, redirect all of your users' data to a server, and have an base image for reloads.
  Then just ghostcast (or whichever tool) the boxes, rather than try to remove infection.
  All the user data is up at the server, so you're in the clear there, and just need to worry about patching.
  Upkeep on a base image is much more effective than upkeep on a couple hundred machines.
  This just makes me want to push a solution like VMView down their throats...
102. Re: Far cheaper options by JakeBurn · 2013-05-01 05:31 · Score: 1
  
  Lol. Says every jackass who ignores the millions of people still using xp or who just switched to 7. I love when people act like every entity with 1000+ workstations are anywhere near giving a shit about new tech. The vast majority of people using computer at a desk are doing so at companies that probably don't have cloud anything on their 10 year plan.
103. Re:Far cheaper options by Darinbob · 2013-05-01 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  A techie should be the one in charge of purchasing and fixing things. What government agency honestly has a public servant middle manager as the computer systems expert? I can't even imagine the most dysfunctional government putting a bureaucrat as the help desk support or computer installer. That middle manager is going to hire some flunky to do the job.
  This is also Germany. They have environmental laws about what goes in trash and what doesn't, EU regulations about disposal of electronic components, etc. Did they actually "trash" these machines, or did they send them back to the vendors, donate to charities, retain parts of maintenance, etc?
104. Re: Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-05-01 06:34 · Score: 0
  
  If they cant find the menus they'll assume it's windows 8. Dummy!
105. Re: Far cheaper options by PCeye · 2013-05-01 07:08 · Score: 1
  
  How is this a troll comment? If you're going to change the OS, there's a cost to training staff and to install the OS. Also, those PC's likely have a Windows license already, so the estimated costs are likely all IT services to restore all the machines.
106. Re:Far cheaper options by Hognoxious · 2013-05-01 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  I thought the main purpose of SAP was to provide Oracle's "solutions" with competition in the business space of "most poorly written software it's possible to spend very large amounts of money on".
  If that's true those fiendishly cunning huns must have invented time travel. SAP was founded in 1972, Oracle in 1977 (and they were a database company first, the apps came a decade later).
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
107. Re:Far cheaper options by cthulhu11 · 2013-05-01 08:35 · Score: 1
  
  Proof that separation of church and state is a good idea.
108. Re:Far cheaper options by Anonymous Coward · 2013-05-01 10:55 · Score: 0
  
  Do the simple and obvious math... They estimated a cost of 130,000 to clean 170 PCs. That's one heck of an annual salary for bulk reloading of windows that could be done in a couple weeks.
  Idiots.
109. Re:Far cheaper options by lefin1 · 2013-05-01 14:14 · Score: 1
  
  No shit!
110. Re:Far cheaper options by Ash+Vince · 2013-05-01 23:39 · Score: 1
  
  A techie should be the one in charge of purchasing and fixing things. What government agency honestly has a public servant middle manager as the computer systems expert?
  If you are a decent techie you can earn far more working in the private sector than you can working in government. Also, it is tremendously frustrating working in the public sector if you are competent because of the utter retards you have surrounding you in the public sector. You also have to deal with people who go sick every other day and never get fired because their manager does not want to take the risk of screwing up firing someone and all the crazy european labour laws you have to follow in the process.
  This is all quite annoying to most decent techies I know are pretty driven so the only people who stay in the public sector for longer than it takes to earn their first decent reference (that gets them the better paid private sector job) are the people who seem some benefit from it. The benefit is never financial so usually it is that they get to doss about all day and do fuck all.
  
  --
  I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
111. Re: Far cheaper options by Hognoxious · 2013-05-02 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  Unless they were in storage for a year they weren't much older than they were when they got infected. But perhaps that period included the magic day when they switched from "working, but don't try cad or video editing on them" to "obsolete shite that'll be noticeably laggy even in a bash shell".
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Germany? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 21:13 · Score: 1

I thought their government ran on Linux. What happen?
1. Re:Germany? by DarkRat · 2013-04-29 21:23 · Score: 2
  
  only in very few part of germany. Munich for example
2. Re:Germany? by Luckyo · 2013-04-29 22:02 · Score: 1
  
  A few cities. "Government" is not a single solid entity.
3. Re:Germany? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:09 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  There a very few local municipals using Linux. Some are even moving away from Linux and back to Windows.
  OSS is officially endorsed and favoured. But most of the stuff is still Windows.
4. Re:Germany? by multi+io · 2013-04-29 22:26 · Score: 2
  
  This "incident" happened in a state government (in the state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern), not in the federal government.
5. Re:Germany? by prefec2 · 2013-04-29 23:25 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The original article is on the German federal state Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, which is a small state in the north east of Germany. It is not the central government in Berlin. I can understand if people find that confusing. However, there are 16 federal states. Every one of them has a ministry of education.
  Furthermore, the German government replaced Windows for Linux in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but after the election of the present government, they changed it back, because they are conservative and neo-liberal and do not like this commie Linux stuff. Officially, they determined that the other Ministries were not able to share documentation, because the Ministry of Foreign Affairs used ODT and they used DOC. The fun fact here, ODT is mandatory for all government documentation (but obviously only on paper not in reality).
6. Re:Germany? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:27 · Score: 0
  
  Crazy ignorants,
  A Linux network installation would fix all, and 1 person can install all the computers, in far less than a year.
  Being educational a video explaining how to use YUMI to make USB installers for a distro would make with a little time from teachers to install all the computers with any Linux disto.
The Google translated article by SternisheFan · 2013-04-29 21:16 · Score: 4, Informative

Schwerin: virus-infested computer? From the waste so ...
What would be the mountains of garbage and how empty the purse in this country, if that would make anyone like that? Schwerin Ministry of Education made with 170 virus-infected computers, leaving them short shrift unceremoniously throw in the trash. The State Court of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern has carried out the initial purchase of 170 computers now reprimanded. "The approach taken is not up to the principle of efficiency and economy." € 187,300 cost of the new equipment and installation services to taxpayers.
The seemingly insurmountable pest, the computer of the teacher training institute (IQMV) in Schwerin, Rostock, Neubrandenburg and Greifswald was seized in September 2010, was the Conficker worm . In addition, the computer should have been more affected by some other viruses, such as the Ostsee-Zeitung reported first.
As the Court in its report criticizes for 2012, the Ministry of Education have had "no IT security concept" and established the new purchase with "faulty IT equipment". Further explanation and evidence remained the Ministry guilty. It "could [...] not state whether the IT systems of the IQMV were actually affected the extent mentioned above. Protocols of anti-virus software could only be provided for the location of Greifswald, despite repeated requests, which, however, no massive fund of was to remove viruses at the relevant time. "
In addition, the Department did not properly consider how costly cleaning the computer had actually been. The Ministry of Education guess the cost of cleaning initially to around 130,000 euros. The cost of 152,300 euros for an already registered for the fiscal years 2010/2011 published by new acquisition in a different light. The additional costs for installation were estimated at around 35,000 euros. Thus, the Ministry decided only to clean the affected server and otherwise replace all systems.
As the Court points out the country, the Ministry has now committed an IT security concept and develop "its supervisory task perceive so that an efficient and goal-oriented control and monitoring will be necessary." For since the Ministry has provided no "evidence of the actual damage and the causes for the occurrence of the damage," "should [...] be left open whether carried out by the complete replacement of the [computer] is a repetition of the damage is excluded http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2FSchwerin-Virus-verseuchter-Rechner-Ab-auf-den-Muell-damit-1851718.html
1. Re:The Google translated article by stepdown · 2013-04-29 22:12 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  That actually reads pretty well, we should pass Timothy's posts through Google Translate in future.
Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 21:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

If its 130,000 euros to fix a virus infection and 187300 to upgrade AND fix the virus infection, then you may as well upgrade.
The real problem here is the 130,000 euros to fix a virus infection.
1. Re:Money well spent by gl4ss · 2013-04-29 21:32 · Score: 1
  
  If its 130,000 euros to fix a virus infection and 187300 to upgrade AND fix the virus infection, then you may as well upgrade.
  The real problem here is the 130,000 euros to fix a virus infection.
  yeah.. 130 000 for 170 computers. could have bought new computers with the "fix" money too.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
2. Re:Money well spent by gbjbaanb · 2013-04-29 22:02 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Conficker.... suddenly it becomes clear. I know an organisation that was infected, and they ended up spending 2 weeks with a Microsoft consultant to clear everything up. The problem is that it spreads too quickly, so when you clear a PC and move on to the next, it re-infects the first one. Silly old Microsoft.
  So, if they upgraded their PCs too.... makes perfect sense. I wouldn't have binned the old ones though, I'd have wiped the HDDs and sold them or given them away.
3. Re:Money well spent by AdmV0rl0n · 2013-04-29 22:15 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  This thread is disappointing. So much hate. Hate leads to fear, and fear leads to the dark side.
  Anyway. Conflicker. Nasty. Simple. Old. A clean up is not easy, but conflicker requires some bad baselines to be operating for it to get through and thrive. If you fix the baseline issues, the clean up can follow. A clean susyem thats updated properly isn't infectable via conflicker. So frankly a system sorted put back in should be fine. You'll obviously have to do this step by step and yes, there is a price. Most orgs this size have IT staff so I don't know how the figures are drawn up.
  I also have to say, the clean up tools and detection tools mean attacking conflicker infection is on the easier end of security clean up. The story is sad because it seems to indicate ever present stupidity in public services. Advocates and supporters of public services need to understand that its not a ob creation scheme. If someone has a role or job, they must be competant. Trained. Skilled. People who are not have no place in it.
  
  --
  We`re all equal .. Just some of us are less equal than others.
4. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:23 · Score: 0
  
  If you have time to wipe HDDs, you have time to reimage them.
5. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:33 · Score: 0
  
  Anyway. Conflicker. Nasty. Simple. Old. A clean up is not easy
  Are you saying that Conficker is one of those nasty bios-viruses that survive step one of any serious virus cleaning?
  1. format or fdisk. If you're using MS standard tools, don't forget fdisk /mbr.
  2. reinstall.
  Each step of course has to be done from clean media (e.g. a bootable cd).
6. Re:Money well spent by AdmV0rl0n · 2013-04-29 22:44 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  No, conflicker has worm elements. So, the hard part of the clean up is not per se an individual machine. Its that you need to solve the baseline problems that allow conflicker to do its thing.
  Re-installing 'stuff' won't make this go away. Doing it wrong just reinfects the machine.
  So, as I said, what has to be done is the cause and baselines that allow conflicker to replicate have to be solved (harder part) - and then machines with good baselines go through clean up and go back on the network (easier part..)
  http://support.microsoft.com/kb/962007
  Any tech learning about conflicker can read about it, and start to understand what needs to be fixed. Patch, correct password weakenesses, stop autorun etc etc. Today, this is somewhat simple as a lot of tools and detection tools exist.
  People in threat waving around Fdisk and re-install media saying 'they could fix this' - probably in fact are clueless and need to understand the problems involved. Conflicker breeds off poor security and bad baselines. Thats how it gets in. Thats how it replicates. Thats how it hangs around and re-infects.
  
  --
  We`re all equal .. Just some of us are less equal than others.
7. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:59 · Score: 0
  
  And if you cannot do that (because of lack of time/skills/...) you can always wipe and reinstall.
8. Re:Money well spent by AdmV0rl0n · 2013-04-29 23:09 · Score: 1
  
  And how would that fix the problem - exactly?
  Wipe - reinstall - re-infect. Well done. Do you like wasting your time and everyone else's?
  
  --
  We`re all equal .. Just some of us are less equal than others.
9. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:19 · Score: 0
  
  So you say those 130k euro include reeducation and all? Hope those 187k to buy new includes those too.
  Anyways, WTF? "You clean one machine, and then it immediately reinfects from another, oooooh!" - reimaging several machines at once is such an advanced concept?
10. Re:Money well spent by AmiMoJo · 2013-04-29 23:25 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The problem is that it spreads too quickly, so when you clear a PC and move on to the next, it re-infects the first one.
  Then the first one wasn't really fixed, was it? Microsoft released a patch that blocks re-infection so all you have to do download that and their Malicious Software Removal Tool to a CD, disconnect each machine from the network and run them in order. Problem solved.
  The high cost is probably due the cost of certifying that the infection was removed and the PCs are safe to use with sensitive data again. Removal is trivial if somewhat time consuming.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
11. Re:Money well spent by Peter+Simpson · 2013-04-29 23:26 · Score: 1
  
  Well, you could recycle the machines and get some kind of payment if they're subsequently sold. This is what the IT guys at my company do with old machines. The disks are wiped, reformatted and reloaded with a fresh copy of Windows (by the recycler), then the machines are cleaned up and resold in a storefront. We get a portion of the selling price (wither to keep or to donate) and the folks in the community get low cost machines.
12. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:30 · Score: 0
  
  What part of remove infected PCs from the network don't you little dweebs understand? You fucking newbies suck at all things IT. It is impossible to [re-infect the first one] if you properly removed it and applied the patch. 5 minutes per PC, 4 years ago. That's right it was 4 years ago. 2 weeks... pfff... go fuck yourself. You are just milking the whole situation. What's next? Are you going to claim that the Monkey.b virus is taking over your network. "Yes sir, it will take at least 200,000 to remove it! But we could do it for the same amount if you buy these fancy new computers from my friend! These shiny new computers can't be infected!" Corruption at it's finest. Nothing like a kick-back to make the day go by faster.
13. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:04 · Score: 0
  
  Make sure update 958644 is slipstreamed into your new install media, of course; it fixes the vulnerability that Conficker was using to propagate.
14. Re:Money well spent by SJHillman · 2013-04-30 00:30 · Score: 1
  
  Or just, you know, unplugging the network cable of any machines not known to be clean until you're ready to take care of them. Downtime is still less than throwing them in the trash.
15. Re:Money well spent by SJHillman · 2013-04-30 00:33 · Score: 1
  
  We had an entire department insisting that one of their patch cables was infected and that it was infecting any PC was plugged into it because two different PCs got infected while (coincidentally) plugged into the same jack, several months apart. Maybe we should have removed the patch cable to prevent reinfection.
16. Re:Money well spent by SJHillman · 2013-04-30 00:36 · Score: 2
  
  I've been trying to get my company to do this. Most of the machines we throw out are higher end Core 2 Duos that just need Windows reinstalled (if that) to bring them back to optimal. Unfortunately, the Powers that Be have decreed they have to go in the bin for a recycling company to pick them up. The end result is that we pay someone to resell our PCs that we've already wiped and don't see a dime of.
17. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:45 · Score: 0
  
  Unfortunately, when you reconnect them or install from scratch, they get infected while you're downloading security patches. Been there, done that.....
18. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:45 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  No matter what OS you use (considering the OS licence is already paid)... How can the format of the drive + reinstall for 170 machines cost 130k$
  Quick estimate: IT guy is paid 100$/h (gross overestimate) and can reinstall 1 machine per hour (gross overestimate)... Total: 17k$
  How the fuck do they estimate 10x that???
19. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:47 · Score: 0
  
  which comes up to about 765ea.
  i would have done it for 200ea + the cost of air fare & hotel and they still would have only paid a bit over 25% of that 130000.
20. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:10 · Score: 0
  
  You might want to learn about using images for reinstalls or at least about slipstreaming patches in your install media..
21. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:22 · Score: 0
  
  Conflicker breeds off poor security and bad baselines.
  One such bad baseline includes Microsoft Windows. If you went round re-installing a different operating system as you went along, then the infection wouldn't spread. The cost of Microsoft viruses should be included in the original budget for systems.
22. Re:Money well spent by bickerdyke · 2013-04-30 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  well... knowing the gouvernments worldwide a bit, those 13000 were probably the cost to get the malicious software removal kit certified and getting the permission to run it on oh-so-precious office machines....
  
  --
  bickerdyke
23. Re:Money well spent by avxo · 2013-04-30 01:48 · Score: 1
  
  What's a gross underestimate is "reinstalling one machine per hour". Maybe if you're lucky and can do image-based deployments, where everything is already on the image and all you do is image it onto the drive. Then an hour per machine would be a realistic estimate.
  But chances are they would have to install Windows separately on each machine, followed by the tedious process of downloading and waiting for update after update to install, then installing virus and security software, "productivity suites" and any other software that they need, each likely to have its own updates. Don't forget installing drivers for hardware, which may differ from machine to machine, setting up printers (local and network), mounting network shares, applying security policies, and so on and so forth.
  So yeah... 1 machine per hour isn't a "gross overestimate". It's a gross understimate.
24. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:01 · Score: 0
  
  1. Wait for everyone to go home.
  2. Disconnect all PCs from network connections.
  3. Run removal tool on all PCs.
  4. Install updated virus protection to prevent re-infection.
  5. Run removal tool on all removable media.
  Not saying it's a cheap or easy solution, but if you're getting "reinfected faster than you can clean it" your cleaning method is idiotic.
25. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:16 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  1 machine per hour as gross underestimate is gross incompetence.
  There should be an image or at least an install disk with all updates slipstreamed, and even manually you can do reinstall on 3-5 machines at once.
26. Re:Money well spent by ImprovOmega · 2013-04-30 02:17 · Score: 2
  
  I've built Windows XP install media with SP3 and all possible patches slipstreamed in (on DVD, but it still worked), then a supplemental CD with non-slippable updates (IE8, .NET, all that stuff). It's possible to install, offline, an XP machine with all updates applied to it in two reboots after the base install. Windows 7 is even easier since you just build a custom .wim file and replace the default install.wim with your custom one and bam. Nothing is unslippable in Win7.
27. Re:Money well spent by mapsjanhere · 2013-04-30 02:35 · Score: 2
  
  I don't know if you ever deployed Windows on more than one machine at a time, but my last upgrade from scratch roll-out of 25 machines to Win 7 and Office 2010 took 8h, half of which was dealing with 2 older machines with "compatibility issues" and with a legacy printer. Win XP took more running around and hitting the "restart" button for the updates, but the total time in front of a machine was still less than 15 min. For most machines the longest time was manually typing in the license codes. To me the real story is - how does any large institution get infected with a at the time two year old virus? Confiker was a 2008/2009 infection, this happened in 2010, and not even their servers were secured. But being a German Beamter immunizes you from any negative job action, and there are no merit raises, so why bother.
  
  --
  I'm aging rapidly, I bought a new game and had no idea if my machine was good for it.
28. Re:Money well spent by AdmV0rl0n · 2013-04-30 02:45 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, no infection. Sadly no working system either.
  Fail. Go away.
  
  --
  We`re all equal .. Just some of us are less equal than others.
29. Re:Money well spent by Ziggitz · 2013-04-30 03:22 · Score: 1
  
  We really need to know how they came up with that figure. If you have decently paid employees not able to work for 2-3 days while repaving those computers that could be a large chunk of that cost in terms of lost productivity. 3 days of 170 employees not working is almost 2 years of one employee not working. Then consider the age of the computers. For little over a third more of the cost to fix, they could get new computers, it could easily be worth it to upgrade to new computers if the original ones were old enough. The increased lifespan of new computers could alone justify the cost and the increased productivity from having up to date hardware only helps.
  
  --
  There is no memory shortage. yes I have heard of XFCE. Go away.
30. Re:Money well spent by war4peace · 2013-04-30 03:48 · Score: 1
  
  The problem is that it spreads too quickly, so when you clear a PC and move on to the next, it re-infects the first one. Silly old Microsoft.
  This is arguably in the top 10 dumbest remarks of the month. And it's the end of the month, so pretty impressive achievement, my young Padawan.
  If you're IT staff and that's what's happening to you when you clean up Conficker, you should just go plant a garden and let someone else get your job. You know, retire honorably before you get covered in ridicule.
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
31. Re:Money well spent by war4peace · 2013-04-30 03:50 · Score: 1
  
  Aww, you're fighting the Windows haters with an insightful post. Heroic, but ultimately not effective. It's like saying "milk is good" to the notmilk.com crowd.
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
32. Re:Money well spent by war4peace · 2013-04-30 03:52 · Score: 2
  
  And you have NOT? Oh my God! I bet that cable was squirming around and hissing for months.
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
33. Re:Money well spent by war4peace · 2013-04-30 03:54 · Score: 1
  
  Same here. We have a contract with a company which "destroys" our old machines after we get rid of them. By that I mean that actually they say they destroyed the machines, whereas in fact they probably resell them (or disassemble and resell the parts). Our company sees no dime.
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
34. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 04:22 · Score: 0
  
  The worms will find their way into the cleaned machines even when the system you are working on is unplugged from the network?
  Magic!
  Or you are a fucking retard.
  I'll give Occam a call.
35. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 04:37 · Score: 0
  
  Gross overestimate? My company charges $150 an hour for my services, and I'm not even the highest tier tech. But then again, I service Windows Servers, so my time is worth more than the typical linux guy's time.
36. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 05:47 · Score: 0
  
  Really? Windows takes around 1-2 hours to install, then lets not forget office and the rest of the software, give it like 5 hours. Even with imaging software and then going in to configure computer names, etc, still will take about 3 hours. But you are going to say to do it over the lan? Run scripts. Hmm, try 25 computers over 1Gb connection and see what happens. Lets not forget if you just think they will be ready the next morning, right! Most of the time out of 25 computers imaged over lan or media, 5 or so have issues. I love techs that are really good with ideas on papers when in real world is not as such. Either you do something proper and not patching to make it work or do not do it at all.
37. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 06:58 · Score: 0
  
  You don't even need to do that. A properly configured firewall or IPS (snort anyone?) can block it from spreading around even as you slipstream the installs. Still, this seems like a monumental waste and not to mentioned extremely eco-unfriendly. I agree with above posters that this should be turned into a school project, and/or at the very least the hardware should be donated to charity. I dunno who they talked to about that price but it seems excessive for what I consider to be a very small pool of PC's. You can knock off a whole digit from that price and call me, I'll have your shit fixed in a jiffy.
38. Re:Money well spent by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 07:38 · Score: 0
  
  Install Windows and install any programs you need. Insert thumbdrive with linux live-cd and boot to it. Resize your partition to be as small as possible and make an image of it. Now create a linux live-cd for thumbdrive which boots itself, writes your image to the beginning of the drive, resizes the partition to fit the disk, mounts the partition and runs a script which gives computer a new network name, changes serial keys in windows registry for stuff that needs it (windows itself, office or whatever you may have). Now clone your thumbdrive to 10 other drives. Insert your thumbdrive to first machine and start it. Go to the next one and repeat. Lastly go to the first one and type in serials and name it.
  Profit!
39. Re:Money well spent by WGFCrafty · 2013-04-30 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  I believe the difficulty you ascribe to the removal task is unfounded. Especially the assertion that people HERE would have a hard time. Seriously, a bootable OS with an AV on it, and you've got the name-> google and BAM you know exactly what you're dealing with.
  Most of us with non-technical friends have probably removed it once or twice years ago. Yet you say "most of you guys won't even have a clue, why you would have to read a Microsoft article! That requires mad skillz."
40. Re:Money well spent by WGFCrafty · 2013-04-30 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't know such a place exists. Who doesn't like milk and cookies, cereal, chai tea, chocolate milk? Man, fuck them. Y'know it's not like anyone is forcing them to drink milk. And cows like it because they get sore if they aren't milked. In fact, modern dairy farms have milking carousel so when the cows decide they need a milking, they hop on and get cleaned, and hop off when it's done. All they have to do is eat and socialize, Mooooooo.
41. Re:Money well spent by roscocoltran · 2013-04-30 08:26 · Score: 1
  
  The more I read about Windows administration the more I like my linux machines. You even give nicknames to virus ("Conficker"), just like it was the usual thing to discuss during coffee breaks. "Hey I got a Conficker this morning!" This news makes no sense at all unless the PC were totally broken in the first place, which has no link to the virus problem. Arguing more is like discussing if a missile destroyed the Pentagon or not
42. Re:Money well spent by WGFCrafty · 2013-04-30 08:28 · Score: 1
  
  Why can't you talk to your CTO or someone about destroying HDDs, reusing non -sensitive HDDs, and donating wiped PCs to a community college for students who can't afford home PCs. My psychology teacher did this with donated PCs, in fact he got my first computer, a 350 Mhz Dell Optiplex.
43. Re:Money well spent by heson · 2013-04-30 08:44 · Score: 1
  
  ... followed by the tedious process of downloading and waiting for update after update to install, then installing virus and security software, "productivity suites" and any other software that they need, each likely to have its own updates...
  Who the hell would do that if they got more than a few machines, update the frekkin image, then clone. Follow up with some polish.
44. Re:Money well spent by Darinbob · 2013-04-30 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, for 170 machines. That's 764 euros to fix the virus on one machine!! Or to replace it's over 1100 euros. Sounds like extremely high labor costs to me.
45. Re:Money well spent by AdmV0rl0n · 2013-04-30 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  I believe the difficulty you ascribe to the removal task is unfounded. Especially the assertion that people HERE would have a hard time. Seriously, a bootable OS with an AV on it, and you've got the name-> google and BAM you know exactly what you're dealing with.
  Most of us with non-technical friends have probably removed it once or twice years ago. Yet you say "most of you guys won't even have a clue, why you would have to read a Microsoft article! That requires mad skillz."
  OK, here is what I believe.
  1. You're an idiot. There. I said it.
  2. Go re-read my actual input. Then re-read it until you get it.
  3. People HERE in the main - in this thread have talked bollocks. I think a level well below 50% have some idea of what they deal with, the rest are the idiot majority.
  4. Cleaning up conflicker off a single machine re your none technical friends is totally irrelevant. And thats before I smash you over the head and point you at baselines. What the *fuck* is the point in walking round with your glorious bootable AV disk, when after you 'clean' it and turn on the re-infection takes place.
  I would go into the facts that you have to quaratine and create a controlled environment, fix the base problems, and do the patching. The cleaning off the virus from individual machines is the easy part. The scale is the difficult part, not the removal from a box.
  *I've worked large conflicker clean ups. Unless you have - shut your fucking cake hole.
  
  --
  We`re all equal .. Just some of us are less equal than others.
46. Re:Money well spent by SJHillman · 2013-04-30 09:52 · Score: 1
  
  You have a firewall or IPS on every single PC? It's being reinfected from other machines within the organization (as in, the same LAN segment)
47. Re:Money well spent by chilvence · 2013-04-30 23:32 · Score: 1
  
  He does have a point, you can save time making custom windows images.
  Except for the fact that on the other side of the fence, slipstreaming all the latest updates into an easy to use install image has been standard operating procedure pretty much the whole time...
48. Re:Money well spent by ImprovOmega · 2013-05-06 06:35 · Score: 1
  
  Well to give Microsoft a little credit, easy to use install images have been the norm since at least Windows Vista (around 2006). There's still no good reason why this wasn't the case with XP/2000 also though.
Happens more often than you think by aepervius · 2013-04-29 21:22 · Score: 1

In various school / university I was in the virus infection were dealt in either way :
1) ignore it
OR 2) buy a new machine give the old to the trash

I am not kidding you , I saw back in my day 12 PC desktop being sent to the trash because they had a variation of PONG virus on their HDD (that was DOS time).

--
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Conficker???? by miknix · 2013-04-29 21:25 · Score: 1

What is this? 2008?
1. Re:Conficker???? by symbolset · 2013-04-29 22:08 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Yesterday the Conficker Working Group saw 634 million HTTP hits on Conficker domains from 1.7 million unique IP addresses. This is seems to be a fairly static figure going on three years now.
  
  --
  Help stamp out iliturcy.
2. Re:Conficker???? by RogueyWon · 2013-04-29 22:29 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Unfortunately, it's still very much alive and out there. The parents PC contracts it regularly (my dad has appalling security and browsing habits). A friend of mine (who I generally regard as more IT literate than I am) just spent a weekend cleaning an infection of it off his (fully-updated, Macafee-profected) Windows machine.
  And now for a gratuitous side-rant:
  The source of my friend's infection was apparently a minor video-hosting site carrying game-walkthroughs. On balance, I believe him on this, because I'd had warnings from AVG about such sites myself in the past.
  The trend over the last few years has been for game-walkthroughs to shift from text-format to long sequences of videos. Personally, I hate, loathe and despise this trend from a convenience point of view (try searching 30 videos for how to find that pesky item you're missing, compared to doing a quick search on a text file). But it's had some other unpleasant side effects.
  See by default, these videos go on youtube. Thing is, however, game publishers sometimes object to complete video walkthroughs of their games being hosted there and do DMCA takedowns. So the videos then crop up on less notable video-hosting sites. Many of which appear to be malware infested hellholes.
  So the moral of my (horribly off-topic) side rant: video walkthroughs suck. They're difficult to search, they're inevitably narrated by some idiot called "Tad" who feels the need to say how stoned he is roughly every 30 seconds and - they're turning into a really horrible malware vector.
3. Re:Conficker???? by SgtChaireBourne · 2013-04-29 22:54 · Score: 1
  
  Look at the stats. The old ones never really go away. They just get overshadowed by the newer ones. A little bit of trickery is also done with counting variants as separate malware. Anything to keep the stats down.
  
  --
  Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
4. Re:Conficker???? by ildon · 2013-04-30 02:11 · Score: 2
  
  People do video walkthroughs because they're easily monetizable. I can make a video for a game and put it up on Youtube and get ad partner money. If I write a text walkthrough and put it on GameFAQs I'm pretty sure I get exactly $0 forever. If I try to host it myself and put ads on my site, it's likely no one will ever read it because people will just go to Youtube, GameFAQs, or the game's wikia site if it's popular enough to have one.
  It sucks, but that's how it is. Expect more video walkthroughs in the future.
5. Re:Conficker???? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 05:42 · Score: 0
  
  Videos are so popular now because of all the functionally illiterate people who have joined the internet. Why take an hour to read a paragraph and still not quite understand it when a talking head can read it to you in five minutes?
6. Re:Conficker???? by Darinbob · 2013-04-30 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  Videos of most everything suck. Except for maybe for sex education. I don't understand this trend to make everything trivial into a long boring video. Two paragraphs to describe the solution versus a 4 minute video. Usually a low quality video showing a guy typing in commands, while speaking the commands out loud, sometimes spelling out words because they know you can't read it. My only guess is that these idiots all think they can make some pocket change on youtube if they get enough views.
7. Re:Conficker???? by Darinbob · 2013-04-30 09:20 · Score: 1
  
  Remember back when people did hobby stuff without expecting to get paid for it?
8. Re:Conficker???? by readingaccount · 2013-04-30 17:53 · Score: 1
  
  Thing is, however, game publishers sometimes object to complete video walkthroughs of their games being hosted there and do DMCA takedowns.
  I have yet to actually hear about that happening, but I'm not calling you a liar because honestly, I wouldn't be surprised at all to hear about this being commonplace. Shit, given the way a huge number of modern games play more like interactive movies than traditional games (what with everything needed to have cinematics and epic settings), modern games are actually well suited to being watched rather than played sometimes. It's cheaper too.
  In any case, so long as sites like this (http://www.longplays.org/) continue to exist, it doesn't really matter what the publishers try - people will continue to make Let's Plays and full playthroughs because hell, it's better than piracy.
They can't rei-mage them with windows? by MichaelSmith · 2013-04-29 21:25 · Score: 1

How much does that cost? One worker should be able to do a machine in ten minutes or so.

--
http://michaelsmith.id.au
1. Re:They can't rei-mage them with windows? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 21:38 · Score: 0
  
  More like 170 machines in 10 minutes...
  Give me a few grand and I'll fucking do it for you.
2. Re:They can't rei-mage them with windows? by flyingfsck · 2013-04-29 22:20 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Yeah, but it is Germany. In order to do IT work on a PC, you need to have a plumber and an electrician on standby and you are not allowed to do more than one PC at the same time...
  
  --
  Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
3. Re:They can't rei-mage them with windows? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:26 · Score: 0
  
  And then you'll reinstall all the other applications, configure it for the user, restore their local files, etc. All in 10 minutes? Very impressive. Remember, you're not working in some sort of "single system image" thin client boot from the network nirvana. There's 170 machines, all with different configurations and applications installed, etc.
4. Re:They can't rei-mage them with windows? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:58 · Score: 0
  
  Having witnessed union thugs, the only appropriate description, while setting up some production lines at our sister company in Mebane NC I can asure you german unions are nothing like that.
5. Re:They can't rei-mage them with windows? by onyxruby · 2013-04-30 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  I once had to have an electrician, welder, technician, security guard and maintenance worker all lined up to some diagnostics work. This was at a federal prison and they had bolted the computers to the desks and welded the bolts sealed to keep them from being used as weapons. This was back in the day of token ring and thin net and we had to swap out cards to find out which one was fried by a lightning strike.
  Welder - Remove and restore the welds for the bolts.
  Electrician - Unplug and plug in the thin net (it was a wire and thus required an electrician).
  Maintenance Worker - Remove and restore the bolts to allow access inside the computers.
  Technician - Work inside the computer.
  Security Guard - It's a prison, the security guard was there to keep an eye on the tools more than the people.
  Sadly, this isn't a joke and I really did need 5 people to perform the diagnosis. On the plus side since it was a prison I knew /exactly/ when the lightning bolt hit nearby and there was no guessing about how close it hit. I have absolutely no doubt that the cost of the workers and parts easily exceeded the cost of the computer.
6. Re:They can't rei-mage them with windows? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 06:17 · Score: 0
  
  Having had the misfortune of trying to get work done on my house, I can assure you German businesses are exactly like that. They don't give a f*ck about their customers, they have narrow monopoly-like jobs that they jealously protect, and they charge an arm and a leg for shoddy work.
7. Re:They can't rei-mage them with windows? by MichaelSmith · 2013-05-01 16:37 · Score: 1
  
  I managed the installation system for an air traffic control system and we could re-image UNIX on 200 machines and get everything: OS plus applications plus data working in 60 minutes.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
Really ? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 21:27 · Score: 0

Throwing the whole PC away ? What about simply replacing the harddisk ?
If that was not considered it sounds to me they need to "throw away" their IT department.
Either that, or there is more to the story. Like them throwing away old hardware and OS, to be replaced by something more current.
1. Re:Really ? by omnichad · 2013-04-30 01:47 · Score: 1
  
  That's just added cost to reformatting the hard drive. What are you, stupid?
Small correction by Sique · 2013-04-29 21:29 · Score: 5, Informative

It's not the Ministry of Education of whole Germany, but of the german State of Mecklenburg, which threw away the PCs after a virus infection.
And there is more to the story: It was estimated, that the cleaning of the PCs would cost ~135,000 €, and a replacement, which was planned anyway, would be 190,000 €, thus they decided to replace early instead of spending the 135,000 € on the clean-up and throw the PCs away a year later.

--
.sig: Sique *sigh*
1. Re:Small correction by gl4ss · 2013-04-29 21:46 · Score: 1
  
  well duh, the more to the story is that they got a quote for 800 euros / computer to fix the issue, an issue their admins/cio should have fixed while on the payroll..
  800 would have been enough to buy new computers.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
2. Re:Small correction by blackraven14250 · 2013-04-29 22:12 · Score: 2
  
  That's making the assumption that they have the man-hour resources to clean up the infection themselves. Likely, they aren't well enough staffed to just divert the number of people needed to cleaning up the PCs in a reasonable amount of time.
3. Re:Small correction by lightknight · 2013-04-29 22:26 · Score: 1
  
  Still, 135K€ for cleaning a bunch of PCs...what did they do, piss off the resident BOFH? Did someone make a lewd comment to IT about their jobs being outsourced to the 'cloud' that week? 'Tis the kind of prices you pay after you insinuate that someone's parents were blood relations...to their face...and then proceed to draw them a diagram outlining family relationships to ensure that there's no chance of a misunderstanding.
  
  --
  I am John Hurt.
4. Re:Small correction by aliquis · 2013-04-29 22:58 · Score: 1
  
  Back when I was at school we had this thing called Ghost ..
5. Re:Small correction by Sique · 2013-04-29 22:59 · Score: 1
  
  This. And they didn't have any disaster recovery planning or any kind of security concept in place. And this was the main reason why the Board of Audit chastised them: Not even after a big failure of IT infrastructure any planning to avoid similar situations in the future.
  
  --
  .sig: Sique *sigh*
6. Re:Small correction by aliquis · 2013-04-29 23:00 · Score: 1
  
  And if the admins couldn't do it / couldn't do their work / sucked at it they could at least had done it once and then asked some pupils to do it for 10 euro / machine.
7. Re:Small correction by antifoidulus · 2013-04-29 23:00 · Score: 1
  
  Well considering their coat of arms they are probably used to getting trolled....
  
  --
  Monstar L
8. Re:Small correction by aliquis · 2013-04-29 23:09 · Score: 1
  
  And also back when I was at school it was needed because they got this thing called pupils ;D
9. Re:Small correction by gl4ss · 2013-04-29 23:16 · Score: 1
  
  That's making the assumption that they have the man-hour resources to clean up the infection themselves. Likely, they aren't well enough staffed to just divert the number of people needed to cleaning up the PCs in a reasonable amount of time.
  they got some sort of cio on payroll. he's got all week for this. if he's unresourced for this, he could have bought the resources for a lot less than 800 euros per hour - even in germany. their staff is going to be spending the same time setting up the new computers as well.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
10. Re:Small correction by mvar · 2013-04-30 00:17 · Score: 1
  
  They could just go out and announce a competition for cleaning these 170 PCs for a maximum amount of, i don't know, 80k? and let the underbidding company take the job. Oh, and 190k for 170 *desktop* computers!?!?! OMFG thats insane money, that's above 1000 euros per PC which lets you buy a high-end system with a descent graphics card. What will they be doing on these, play Crysis?
The cheap solution? by Mad-Bassist · 2013-04-29 21:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

Why not use this as a way to teach the kids how to install the OS from scratch?

--
"The only legitimate use of a computer is to play games." - Eugene Jarvis
It costs them over 750 Euros to reimage a PC? by Chris+Mattern · 2013-04-29 21:31 · Score: 1

Really?
1. Re:It costs them over 750 Euros to reimage a PC? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:47 · Score: 0
  
  If you "reimage a PC" and hook it back on the network, it will become infected again. So what you need to do is to disconnect all machines, reimage them, and the connect them again. This takes time, time during which the users cannot work. On top of that, when the system is back up, they are still stuck with their old PCs.
Depends on the age of the computers by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 21:33 · Score: 1

If the infected computers were nearing their end of life, and the investment in cleaning them was not going to be paid back in the remaining lifespan, then disposing of them was probably a good decision.
You can't estimate this linearly by Hentes · 2013-04-29 21:34 · Score: 2

I guess they simply multiplied the cost of virus removal with the number of machines. But it only takes once to find the source of the problem, the remaining 169 machines could've been fixed at minimal cost after that. And of course, it doesn't cost a cent to just wipe them all clean.
1. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 21:45 · Score: 0
  
  Funny, I sitll get a paycheck. I guess it does cost them something. Assuming generic medium skilled German IT guy's fully burdened cost is $168,000 USD/yr and that this level of effort will require a staffing change (both very good assumptions) then it's quite believable that the effort will take over 1 man-year. Assume 44 usable weeks a year, or 220 useable days, that's roughly 1 machine a day. Assuming they do some sort of configuration control, and that you can't actually push and provision a machine remotely, and that the worker has to go through both government and corporate training for the first 3 weeks and accession costs, you're starting to get pretty close to their $130,000 USD estimate. But that's okay, they work for free and don't have any other work to do, so it doesn't cost a cent. Oh yeah, the $168K/yr is within 2%
2. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:02 · Score: 0
  
  Lets assume they have a proper IT environment with an SOE.
  Even if we assume the accounts were run as Administrator or Conflicker could get escalated privs without the user having them.
  That would require someone at the remote end to give them the ID tags of each machine. Then select EACH.... AND ... EVERY one of those machines to the reimage... ask the end user to reboot and done.
  Calculate those costs... I'd say 10's of thousands at most for IT, and about the same for the users.
  If they didn't have a setup where an SoE was used and a reimage was trivial, WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY DOING?!?!
3. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:21 · Score: 0
  
  German IT guys are able to clean an entire machine a day? No wonder they're worth $170k a year.
4. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by MtHuurne · 2013-04-29 22:31 · Score: 1
  
  Assuming generic medium skilled German IT guy's fully burdened cost is $168,000 USD/yr and that this level of effort will require a staffing change (both very good assumptions)
  Let's say this medium skilled IT guy gets a €3000/month salary, that's €36,000/year. There will be other costs, but it won't come anywhere near the number you assumed. Also, dealing with malware is a standard task when managing Windows desktop PCs, no matter whether you blame it on market share or on Microsoft. So if it requires a staffing change, then they didn't have the right staff to begin with.
  
  Assume 44 usable weeks a year, or 220 useable days, that's roughly 1 machine a day.
  An admin responsible for over 100 desktops should have set up an infrastructure for re-imaging so that it doesn't take 1 day per machine. It's not exactly zero effort like the GP said: you'll still have to warn people that anything they saved on the local hard disk will be lost, for example, but the required effort is in the order of days, not months.
  I wonder where that huge cost estimate came from. Did they need justification to buy the new PCs that they wanted for a while but couldn't get the budget for? Was someone really not looking forward to cleaning the PCs and therefore inflated the cost of doing so? Was it just a made-up number that no-one looked at critically? Because it sounds unlikely to me that the actual costs would be that high.
5. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by malkavian · 2013-04-29 22:36 · Score: 1
  
  $168k for a technician? Fully loaded in Europe, you're probably looking at about $40k for a full loading on tech resource necessary to diagnose and fix this kind of problem.
  You don't necessarily need config control to do a fix, though that would likely entail one later on through the sysops and change control processes worked into the standard working day.
  There are so many inconsistencies and erroneous assumptions in that post that it really did give me a chuckle.
6. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:48 · Score: 0
  
  When i worked at a IT shop, there would be 2 people at any time, to sell, manage stocks, invoices and, do repairs. Cleaning a pc costs 35 euros, and we would do 10 a day while keeping the shop running, so 17 days and 5950 euros and any IT shop could do it. (Doing it bulk, just install fresh one computer with all the software needed and the right configurations and apply that image that to all computers, could cost as low as 2000 euros and be done in 3 days).
7. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by Hentes · 2013-04-30 00:08 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know where exactly these machines were used in the German education system, but my high school did an automatic reimaging of most machines every midnight. So yes, it cost exactly zero. It's not magic, not outside the reach of a school, nor does it need lots of time and work when properly configured. But if remote reimaging isn't an option, you still don't have to do it one desktop at a time. Do it parallel, and it can be done in two weeks.
  Warning people about their data should occur at the time of the virus detection, not at cleanup. It's the cost of the infection, replacing the machines would also make the old data unavailable.
8. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:24 · Score: 0
  
  Exactly. Most modern systems can do a remote boot so point it to an install boot machine, even if they can't:
  Create bootable/installable windows usb thumb drive.
  Clone thumb drive x 5
  Start install on computer 1
  Start install on computer 2... etc...
  5 computers done in under 1 hour.
  Have coffee. Repeat.
  40 computers in 1 day. 200 computers in one work week. Cost of a tech per hour: $30. Cost of reinstallation: $20 in thumb drives. Labor $240/day x 5 = $1200 bucks. (USD). Yes, it's monkey work. Yes, it's boring and not as fun as configuring new toys, but yes, it would have saved a sh*tload of money.
9. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by Hatta · 2013-04-30 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  What? Set the machine to PXE boot. Boot a tiny linux distro that dds the Windows image to the hard disk. Restart all the machines. You're done.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
10. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:19 · Score: 0
  
  Whoever they contract to clean the PCs sure can charge linearly, though.
11. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by enigma48 · 2013-04-30 03:43 · Score: 1
  
  PC#1 complete. PC#54 (still infected) re-infects PC#1. Even if you turn them all off and only put them back on the network after they are wiped: are you sure you found *every* PC with the infection? Are you sure they won't get reinfected again (is your baseline immune to the infection vector?)
  Being completely naive and giving them the benefit of the doubt: someone suggested they planned a replacement cycle anyway (so had a budget approved) with w7 machines already - this expensive fix may have bought them a year more on one-foot-in-the-grave hardware. We're also assuming they had the staff/skill to do the work (unlikely) or to oversee the contractors and have the skill to verify the contractors did the job 100% correctly (unlikely). Plus everyone has to sign up to the risk of "we should spend heaps and if this happens again or something similar happens we all look like morons.."
  W7 may not have been immune to the infection but given everything I've read in this thread, I'm leaning more towards speeding up replacement as the simplest approach here. But looks terrible as a news headline.
12. Re:You can't estimate this linearly by Hatta · 2013-04-30 04:39 · Score: 1
  
  Patch the security hole on the Windows image.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Oh that's all right then by Eunuchswear · 2013-04-29 21:40 · Score: 1

Tell us again about those naughty spendthrift PIGS?

--
Watch this Heartland Institute video
1. Re:Oh that's all right then by Luckyo · 2013-04-29 22:07 · Score: 1
  
  Okay. They'd spend 1.350.000€ on cleaning, because the contractor cleaning those would happen to be a son-in-law of the chief of the agency and successfully charge for ten times the work. Then they'd spend the 190.000€ on new hardware a year later and throw the cleaned PCs out anyway, and pay another 1.000.000€ on consulting fees on how to buy these to the same company.
  Welcome to corrupted as hell Southern Europe. This is pretty tame to stuff that actually happens there. Worth noting that Ireland is NOT in that basket.
2. Re:Oh that's all right then by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:15 · Score: 0
  
  Oh ya!!!!! or not.
  Corruption in southern countries: True. Corrupters: from northern countries.
  One example: Greece and Portugal brought new submarines a few years ago. Billions wasted. Someone in those countries decided to buy them by being gifted large amounts. Who gifted them?!! Germans!!!!
  Corruption exists everywhere. In southern countries people openly talk about it. Northern countries either it gets to court (now and then) or noone risks talking about it. It exists everywhere!!!!
3. Re:Oh that's all right then by Bengie · 2013-04-29 23:47 · Score: 1
  
  If the network was properly configured, general purpose computers would have been free to clean and faculty computers would have costed about 5min-15min of time.
4. Re:Oh that's all right then by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:17 · Score: 0
  
  Well, I would imagine in this case the northeners knew how deals work in the south. I don't think they forced the bribes on anyone unwilling to receive.
5. Re:Oh that's all right then by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:30 · Score: 0
  
  If you think Germany is in Southern Europe, then i've got some bad news for you.
6. Re:Oh that's all right then by Eunuchswear · 2013-04-30 00:44 · Score: 1
  
  Welcome to corrupted as hell Southern Europe. This is pretty tame to stuff that actually happens there. Worth noting that Ireland is NOT in that basket.
  Oh?
  http://www.transparency.org/news/pressrelease/20121205_ireland_suffers_sharpest_drop_on_corruption_perceptions_index
  
  --
  Watch this Heartland Institute video
7. Re:Oh that's all right then by Luckyo · 2013-04-30 02:23 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, the "technological solution to human factor".
  Good luck implementing it.
8. Re:Oh that's all right then by Luckyo · 2013-04-30 02:24 · Score: 1
  
  Those zeroes at the end. They mean nothing?
9. Re:Oh that's all right then by Luckyo · 2013-04-30 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  You're mistaking "relative" with "absolute".
10. Re:Oh that's all right then by Luckyo · 2013-04-30 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  Strange how northerners can work with each other without this corruption. Must be a conspiracy. Southerners are just victims in this!
11. Re:Oh that's all right then by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:54 · Score: 0
  
  Southern Europe?
  Mecklenburg?
12. Re:Oh that's all right then by Eunuchswear · 2013-04-30 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  According to the source Ireland (score 69) is slightly less corrupt than Spain (65) or Portugal (63).
  I cannot see how you can claim "Ireland is NOT in that basket."
  
  --
  Watch this Heartland Institute video
13. Re:Oh that's all right then by Luckyo · 2013-04-30 04:39 · Score: 1
  
  That's not "slightly". For comparison, the least corrupt countries in the world got the score of 90, whereas the most corrupt EU countries that do not have significant corrupting impact of the formerly communist culture scores 62. There is a huge uncrossable chasm between those, and yet the difference in points is only 28 Difference of even a few points suggests significant differences between levels of corruption. This is why TI itself was essentially forced to revise its scale from 1-10 to 1-100.
  Otherwise you could claim that there isn't all that much difference between three least corrupt countries in the world and Ireland's state at its worst.
  Then there's the nature of corruption. Ireland's problems are from significant financial impact of the crisis. Southern Europe has problems with deeply ingrained culture of corruption which is absent in Ireland. As a result we can expect Ireland to improve on the metric this year, while Southern Europe will likely keep on being where it is.
760 Euros per PC by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 21:45 · Score: 3, Insightful

Yet the 'conventional' estimate was 760 euros per PC to fix it...
I think its one of these cases where they're locked into a service contract for the PC they bought, and its easier to bring forward an upgrade than let the service company rip them off. The translation says they'd almost fully depreciated the PCs anyway, so they were several years old anyway.
So now some party (no doubt connected to the service company) is kicking up a stink because they didn't get to rip them off.
But it looks like the right thing to do, if the alternative was to spend 130k euros and next year spend 190k euros to replace them, and you've only got 30k left of right off, then better to save the 100k and move the upgrade forward.
Oh, and warn your fellow government agencies against signing the rip-off maintenance contract.
1. Re:760 Euros per PC by tibit · 2013-04-29 22:11 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  For half of that money I'd fucking take a first class plane trip to Germany, pay for my own hotel, and be done reimaging their PCs over a workweek. That includes deploying whatever they need deployed on those PCs, and leaving a solution in place to reimage them at will. And that's all being quite green when it comes to Windows administration. At work I really only do the minimum needed not to need to muck with it.
  
  --
  A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
2. Re:760 Euros per PC by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:15 · Score: 0
  
  Or maybe it's one of those cases where computer seller is in nice relations with someone there and so "cleaning infection" magically gets too expensive (just pretend you need to buy new licenses for everything and you're set!), or where thrown away computers pop up somewhere near their relatives and not as depreciated as they make it out.
  We don't know for sure either way, but it's either them being incompetent morons when buying into that maintenance contract, or them being embezzling assholes.
3. Re:760 Euros per PC by Bengie · 2013-04-29 23:38 · Score: 1
  
  I wonder how the estimated 760 euros when I've done similar things, which has taken less than 15min of my time. When I was in IT, an all out infection just meant a computer getting re-imaged, which I could start remotely.
  
  Process to re-image a computer
  
  1) Call end user, ask when they won't need their computer for 1 hour
  2) Start re-image remotely
  3) Restore data/setting/installed software, which was all automated and part of the re-image process
  
  Most of my time was playing phone-tag with the end user to make sure everything was working.
4. Re:760 Euros per PC by WGFCrafty · 2013-04-30 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  I'd do it for a plane ticket first class and a guided tour of the city.
Damn by maroberts · 2013-04-29 21:54 · Score: 2

Where are all the machines they threw away?
The traditional art of Dumpster diving plus a Windows or a Linux install would have saved these machines from their fate. If they were scheduled for replacement, then I'm sure some charity or educational establishment could have benefited.

--
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
1. Re:Damn by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:37 · Score: 0
  
  That's what I'm wondering. Did they throw them out-out? Or was somebody able to get "ein sehrgutshoendeal fur viele freiboxxen?"
  If they were thrown into some backrooms first, hopefully students and staff would have gotten some free pickings first before going into the real trash. Would be a chance to setup a small linux serverfarm on the cheap or get boxes good enough for router duty, XBMC or whatever.
2. Re:Damn by Stolpskott · 2013-04-29 22:57 · Score: 1
  
  Where are all the machines they threw away?
  The traditional art of Dumpster diving plus a Windows or a Linux install would have saved these machines from their fate. If they were scheduled for replacement, then I'm sure some charity or educational establishment could have benefited.
  There are many establishments which could have benefited here, but there are two issues with that - first, the machines would have to be sanitized so there is a guarantee that no confidential information is stored on them (90% of government IT disposals ignore that rule, but the Germans are actually among the best at following it); and second, I am pretty sure that the majority of recipient organisations would say "no thanks, we cannot handle the clean-up" if an organisation said "here you go, have 170 PCs that are infected with a virus, all you have to do is clean the virus off the system", either because the recipient organisation is lazy or because they are a charity/educational institution with little or no available IT expertise.
3. Re:Damn by NJRoadfan · 2013-04-29 23:27 · Score: 1
  
  It only takes a few minutes to wipe a hard drive. No organization is going to donate machines with a working OS install anyway.
4. Re:Damn by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:26 · Score: 0
  
  Especially given that simply wiping the HD is cheaper than searching for confidential information and deleting it individually. It also considerably lowers the risk that you missed something (unless your disk wiping software malfunctions without you noticing, you can be sure that no confidential information remains, because there's no information at all that remains).
Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by imsabbel · 2013-04-29 21:59 · Score: 5, Informative

This happened in 2010.
Those were old computers.
They already had the money to buy replacements budgeted in their 2010/2011 budget.
So they had to decide to pull the effort the reimage everything for a couple of months, or just buy the new ones early. Buying the new ones early did cost a bit more (30k for all of them), but less then a cleaning would have cost.
The servers, who where not sheduled for replacement, were reimaged just fine.

--
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
1. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by tibit · 2013-04-29 22:18 · Score: 1
  
  I can't quite imagine a business of that size not having a system in place to reimage machines at will. At one place I work we have two dozen machines and I'm well underway in having them all PXE boot into an imager which then either boots the existing image from the hard drive or updates it prior to booting. Once I finish shaking down the test deployment on a few machines, it should be ready to go. Users have had roaming profiles for years now so that's not an issue.
  
  --
  A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
2. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by Registered+Coward+v2 · 2013-04-29 22:53 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  This happened in 2010. Those were old computers. They already had the money to buy replacements budgeted in their 2010/2011 budget.
  So they had to decide to pull the effort the reimage everything for a couple of months, or just buy the new ones early. Buying the new ones early did cost a bit more (30k for all of them), but less then a cleaning would have cost.
  The servers, who where not sheduled for replacement, were reimaged just fine.
  
  This happened in 2010. Those were old computers. They already had the money to buy replacements budgeted in their 2010/2011 budget.
  So they had to decide to pull the effort the reimage everything for a couple of months, or just buy the new ones early. Buying the new ones early did cost a bit more (30k for all of them), but less then a cleaning would have cost.
  The servers, who where not sheduled for replacement, were reimaged just fine.
  How dare you inject reason and facts into a /. arguement? You're supposed to say Windoze Bad Linux Shiney Free and accuse anyone with a different view of being an MS shill or troll. Replacing rather than cleaning is the right thing to do, it would have been more fiscally irresponsible to clean and then replace, and no doubt under German law the old ones were recycled rather than just dumped in the trash.
  given that reimaging would involve more than simply pushing out a new image but would need machines to be offline to avoid reinfection, there is also productivity losses and associated costs as well.
  
  --
  I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
3. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:59 · Score: 0
  
  So all your infected machines are just siting there on the network ready to reinfect the freshly reimaged ones as soon as they reboot? Great plan there.
4. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by gl4ss · 2013-04-29 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  that's not the problem.
  the problem is that they didn't say that the 800 euros for a reimaging fee was bullshit.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
5. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:25 · Score: 0
  
  So all your infected machines are reimaging at once with a single command from you. Can do that while going away for lunch and have all of them fresh and sparkling by the time you come back.
6. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by hduff · 2013-04-30 00:03 · Score: 1
  
  How dare you inject reason and facts into a /. arguement? You're supposed to say Windoze Bad Linux Shiney Free and accuse anyone with a different view of being an MS shill or troll.
  You sound too reasonable. That has no place in a Slashdot discussion.
  
  --
  "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
7. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:34 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks for the sane info, but I'm not sure if the 30k increase can be be described as "a bit more", that is more than 20% increase in cost. Those numbers result in a cost of 176 euro per machine, what is huge, I can't believe we can't do a mass re-image of those for a tiny fraction of this cost.
8. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by jonr · 2013-04-30 00:40 · Score: 1
  
  Ok. This changes the original quite a bit. But I should be getting used to /. sensational writings by now... *sigh*
9. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by Zeromous · 2013-04-30 02:13 · Score: 1
  
  Depreciation of capital assets is what this is all about, but could they not have destroyed the harddrives and donated the equipment?
  
  --
  ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
10. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by Meeni · 2013-04-30 19:49 · Score: 1
  
  We do use quite a number of computers in our department, and reading that story I immediately thought amortization and depreciation cost. Our machines are budgeted for a fixed use term. Every 4 year, a machine is decommissioned and replaced by a new one (for a variety of reasons, ranging from bell curve reliability, obsolescence, end of maintenance contract, having to buy again all software that comes bundled with a new machine anyway, all reasons make it more cost effective to just replace the hardware rather that keep it until it breaks, which would cause disruption in work flow). When it is decommissioned, it ends up at the auction house, w/o a hard drive (they go to the crusher).
  If we were to experience a massive, disruptive virus infection say 3 month before planned decommissioning, there would be no question that hiring more people to rush repair of current obsolete hardware makes no financial sense, whatsoever. Even if good practices for backup are in place, restoring all these machines in short order takes time and manpower. That means hiring on short order new people (or subcontracting, whatever, that's going to be expensive specialist hours), but more importantly, every hour where one of the 50 or more affected workers cannot use the computer is an hour where you pay people to do nothing, said otherwise, you have fixed cost and no work is done, yo are loosing money, and that may very well be accounted for in the 130k figure for the "repair" option.
11. Re:Clarifications (due to rampant bullshit here) by Meeni · 2013-04-30 19:56 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, and remember, subcontracting for state business is always a load of fun. You have to make a public call for work, have contractors bid, have your accountants respond to bids, and choose the lowest bidder (or risk having to justify your choice in court, personal liability for public funding abuse). Said otherwise, hiring subcontractors to rush a fix takes weeks, if not month of accounting procedures, or risk the accountants going to prison, and then you get the company that responded to the bid with the lowest price, usually somewhat ineffective.
  And during all that time, no work can be done, and you pay all these workers seating in their chairs doing nothing while their work computer is being repaired. Who's wasting money now?
All 1200 don't work. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:00 · Score: 1

Most don't work because the vulnerability has been fixed... years ago.
The most of the rest don't work because they are specialty items...
I think the rest of them are based on the "honor virus"...
conventional means 130,000 Euro by l3v1 · 2013-04-29 22:01 · Score: 1

"cost of cleaning their desktops and servers by more conventional means to 130,000 Euro"

Whoa, whoa, wait people, I'll clean them for half of that price and still be happy with it.

They'd need to look into more efficient "conventional means".

--
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
They ain't dumb by Taco+Cowboy · 2013-04-29 22:01 · Score: 5, Insightful

If the idiots are dumb enough to throw out new PCs because of a virus infection, they most certainly are too dumb to install anything but Windows

I don't think that they are dumb
Actually, they are smart
1. It ain't their money --- the money is from the gummint
2. By throwing the thing away they save all the effort to reformat the disk and to re-install the Windows OS, plus softwares
3. With the computer dumped, they will get to enjoy newer computers --- again, the money came from the gummint

--
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
1. Re:They ain't dumb by bfandreas · 2013-04-29 22:53 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Actually this is a story about stupidity.
  They didn't have virus protection or anything security related. So the taxoffice watchdog told them to come forward with a security plan.
  
  This is just as stupid as it sounds. I've not heard if they were close to a Windows 7 induced hardware upgrade cycle anyway. But there is absolutely no excuse for having no security whatsoever.
  
  --
  20 minutes into the future
2. Re:They ain't dumb by StoneyMahoney · 2013-04-29 22:55 · Score: 1
  
  Not to mention that the 130k probably includes the cost of preventative action to stop this happening again. Much easier and quicker (therefore cheaper) to start from scratch with a new security baseline than try to impose one after the fact.
  Got a client at the moment discovering the very same home truth right now with something rather less virulent that Conficker running wild on their network. That'll teach them how "optional" AV update subscriptions are.
3. Re:They ain't dumb by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:15 · Score: 0
  
  So they don't need to install any software to the new machines?
4. Re:They ain't dumb by Culture20 · 2013-04-30 00:16 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  If they wanted new computers, they could have dumped or wiped the HDDs then auctioned the computers instead of just throwing them away.
5. Re:They ain't dumb by omnichad · 2013-04-30 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  If they have that many PC's, why can't they just re-image them and restore from backup. If it involves much face time with each individual PC then you're doing it wrong.
6. Re:They ain't dumb by Hunter+Shoptaw · 2013-04-30 01:52 · Score: 1
  
  This. It gets me that they would throw out good PC's for a virus, much less not just nuke the drive and restore from an image.
7. Re:They ain't dumb by silviuc · 2013-04-30 02:09 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Not to mention that using something like Clonezilla they can re-image the whole network of PCs provided through PXE (pixie) boot.
  
  Seems that my country is not alone in employing the stupidest morons they can find for jobs in the departments/agencies/institutions that the state controls. Waste of money and waste of human resources in a time when unemployment for young people is soaring.
  
  A damn shame.
8. Re:They ain't dumb by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:30 · Score: 0
  
  Ought to be illegal and punishable to make such decisions which is such a detriment to the environment.
  We can only hope they donated the PC to charity at least.
9. Re:They ain't dumb by war4peace · 2013-04-30 03:07 · Score: 1
  
  Troll detected.
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
10. Re:They ain't dumb by Capt.DrumkenBum · 2013-04-30 05:23 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe after they dumped them, they called their buddy Fritz, and told him where they had been dumped. Fritz shows up with a van, loads up all those "garbage" computers... Craigslist here he comes. (Or whatever the German equivalent to craigslist is.)
  
  --
  If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
11. Re:They ain't dumb by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 05:41 · Score: 0
  
  Actually I worked in an IT company doing IT for busuness and we charged top dollar. I would often quote the cost of virus removal... Format PC, Install/Configure applications, Load device drivers etc and it was very often more cost effective to buy a new PC. The plus side is that they also get a new PC.
12. Re:They ain't dumb by Culture20 · 2013-04-30 05:48 · Score: 2
  
  FritzListe?
13. Re:They ain't dumb by stenvar · 2013-04-30 06:12 · Score: 2
  
  3. With the computer dumped, they will get to enjoy newer computers --- again, the money came from the gummint
  And, more importantly, they'll be fully using their budget this year, allowing them to make an argument to have a budget increase next year. If they save money, their budget will be cut.
14. Re:They ain't dumb by Skuld-Chan · 2013-04-30 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  Use SCCM - I can have an entire collection of machines re-imaged with all their software/profile data and patches in under an hour.
15. Re:They ain't dumb by bkmoore · 2013-04-30 08:13 · Score: 2
  
  Fritz seiner Liste.
16. Re:They ain't dumb by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 19:25 · Score: 0
  
  And, more importantly, they'll be fully using their budget this year, allowing them to make an argument to have a budget increase next year. If they save money, their budget will be cut.
  Ah, I seem someone understands government and corporate budget finance.
  Yup, if you use it all, or at least most of it, you justify it for next year - if you only spend 50% of your budget, then next year they'll only give you 50% of what you had this year, and they'll expect you to cut that yet again.
17. Re:They ain't dumb by Anonymous Coward · 2013-05-01 05:02 · Score: 0
  
  Wrong, they are government computers. That would be unethical behavior. I can throw away state property that isn't needed anymore, well the smaller stuff. The larger stuff has to be surplussed. But I can't sell any of it, not even 15 year old software or 1GB RAM sticks. If the wrong person caught you doing that, you'd get fired, and have a hard time getting another job. It isn't worth it.
18. Re:They ain't dumb by kmoser · 2013-05-01 05:10 · Score: 0
  
  Schindlerslist
19. Re:They ain't dumb by Hognoxious · 2013-05-01 10:23 · Score: 2
  
  So the taxoffice watchdog told them to come forward with a security plan.
  Zey voz just obeyink orders?
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
So thats where they got the idea by Big+Hairy+Ian · 2013-04-29 22:09 · Score: 1

Now I know where our tech support department gets it's strategy from :)

--
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
Work NOT Virus by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:24 · Score: 0

Dirty fucking frausdster. it is a worm, not a virus.
Imaging + Deep Freeze by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 22:40 · Score: 0

How hard would it be for them to combine some form of SOE imaging with Deep Freeze (Applied via MS' guide to apply same settings via GPO as Deep Freeze is not compatible with 7)? Resilient as fuck to viruses, can run what they need to and if you get a virus just remotely wipe.
Lather, Rinse, Repeat. by VortexCortex · 2013-04-29 23:00 · Score: 2, Interesting

There's only so many times you can lather, rinse and repeat in a given time period before someone points out that you're insane.
Some folks might think I'm saying switch to Linux instead of just creating a fresh patch of systems to be virused. Smarter folks would realize that VMs with automated image rollouts would be a much better (and even OS agnostic) investment in the long run.
Is that PC hitting public facing stuff, or does it allow users to bring their own data? Then it should be hosted via VM then unless you're focusing on 3D graphics applications.
Next time they do a Hardware upgrade, you just roll out the VMs again and save virtually all the "support" cost of the rollout. Pays for itself after one or two upgrades. Doubly so if you've got a nasty malware infection since you already have the re-imaging process in place. With hardware supported virtualization standard now, it's kind of dumb to even not be using it...
1. Re:Lather, Rinse, Repeat. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:52 · Score: 0
  
  except for all the hardware incompatibility problems you get with rolling out VM's to desktops. Our org fell for the bullshit line about how easy and cheap it was and we are still paying for it in horrendous support and troubleshooting costs (far more than a conventional imaging process would have ever cost us)
That's how we treat humans here, so why not... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:17 · Score: 0

computers as well.
We dump people as they don't match certain, arbitrary criteria. So why should we treat machines any better?
Welcome to earth, welcome to reality.
cb
Not the German Ministry of Education by prefec2 · 2013-04-29 23:17 · Score: 2

The ministry of education of the federal state Mecklenburg-Vorpommern acted in the illustrated way. Mecklenburg-Vorpommern is a small state in the north east of Germany. The central auditing authority of that state (Landesrechnungshof) recalculated the effort and determined that the cost of the early replacement due to a virus infection was too expensive considering the alternatives.
The German ministry of education is placed in Berlin (which is also a federal state having its own minitry of education) and called "Bundersministerium für Bildung und Forschung" (engl. Federal Ministry of Education and Research).
1. Re:Not the German Ministry of Education by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:38 · Score: 0
  
  Don't Bother. /. is Stupidity Central (LandesUSmoronichgshof)
Outrage by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:24 · Score: 0

This is the second-wurst thing Germany has ever done!
On the bright side... by Mystakaphoros · 2013-04-29 23:40 · Score: 3, Funny

...how often do we get to make fun of Germany for making a boneheaded decision regarding technology? I say we savor this one for years to come, as stories like this are a dime a dozen over in the States.
*epic facepalm* by ZarathustraDK · 2013-04-29 23:45 · Score: 1

They should be dumb-slapped a 1000 times over for doing this.

We had a similar outbreak at one of our locations, same virus, similar amount of pc's. We fixed it by sending out 3 technicians with a bunch of USB's containing containing a fix (Malwarebytes or some other sort of light anti-vir-program). Had the place clean in a frigging day.

Ridiculousness aside, Conficker is a remarkable worm. It really is the kind of cartoon-portrayal of a virus that the general publics' conception of vira seems to be. Put in a usb, it jumps, connect anything it jumps. Only solution is disconnect everything, find an anti-virus program whose process the worm doesn't immediately terminate, and go about it manually. But STILL, 187.000 euro divided among 3 technicians for a days work, YES PLEASE.

--
If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
I don't understand what the problem is by DarkOx · 2013-04-29 23:46 · Score: 1

Its school right? They have students right? While I don't think it would be good to go down the path of using what should be instructional hours to do maintenance on the school this one seems like there would be ways.
I have to assume there are some computer science, computing for business, personal business type courses where doing some operating system installs would be defensible as providing "useful background." So a couple class periods from those courses the students could be borrowed for the purpose. Then you have all the students serving detention who could also be allocated to this sort of work.
How much could it possible cost for a box of ~6GB usb thumbdrives, and Admin to dump a windows installer image with all the updates slip streamed, script out the installation of the whatever else they use ( they probably already have this from whatever their usual deployment method is and could simply adapt it ) and type up some instructions?
I am sure all of this could have been done and in less time at far lower cost than putting the contract out to bid. Let alone paying for the contract and waiting for the work to be done and machines delivered.

--
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
1. Re:I don't understand what the problem is by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:49 · Score: 0
  
  Its school right?
  Wrong. It's a ministry. That is, a government department.
  
  They have students right?
  Wrong. They have politicians and public servants.
2. Re:I don't understand what the problem is by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:02 · Score: 0
  
  Then you have all the students serving detention who could also be allocated to this sort of work.
  Including the students who were given detention for violating the computer policies?
Or even better.. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-29 23:46 · Score: 0

Pay network admins a fixed salary where OT isn't a bonus. Get them to work 12hr shifts to fix the computers by running a ghost image after format. Seriously, I've fixed hundreds of computers in 2-3 days before, it shouldn't cost that much to fix them.
Computer Culling by seven+of+five · 2013-04-29 23:55 · Score: 1

1. Dig trench
2. Dump infected computers in trench
3. Shoot computers with machine guns
4. Cover computers with dirt

Problem solved.
1. Re:Computer Culling by o'reor · 2013-04-30 00:34 · Score: 1
  
  Ach, dis ist der proper Cherman way of dealing wiz it. (now mod me down to oblifion if you vill)
  
  --
  In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
2. Re:Computer Culling by metamatic · 2013-04-30 01:28 · Score: 1
  
  A Final Solution to the computer virus problem!
  
  --
  GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Nuke it from orbit... by fox171171 · 2013-04-29 23:59 · Score: 1

Nuke it from orbit... It's the only way to be sure.
1. Re:Nuke it from orbit... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:03 · Score: 0
  
  WinNuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
Interesting solution by Murdoch5 · 2013-04-29 23:59 · Score: 1

Actually given the IT admin at the school I went to, throwing out the computers would of been the better option. This guy was pretty clueless, it took him three months to figure out how to reload command.com on a machine and install Windows, someone did a del *.*
government math and government bilking by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:15 · Score: 0

Article TLDR, but I assume it's typical goverment mentality against contractor leeching.
This sounds outrageous until you look at how much contracted companies charge government entities for services. I'm sure the 130K was quoted to bring the machiens back up to specs... wipe the units, reinstall the OS and apps and CERIFTY that the worm was no longer present. It's that last bit that allows the contractor to bilk money out of the government. It probably seemed reasonable to toss the machines since the cost quoted to "fix" it is nearly that of the cost of new machines. What they forget is the cost to simply wipe the drives and is all they should have considered.
After that, they have an empty slate and can get a much cheaper contractor to install the OS and configure the system.
This is one of the big benefits of a competent in house IT staff. ( which apparently they didn't have )
High cost by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:28 · Score: 0

The part that throws me is the cost. 170 computers for 187,000 Euros. That's about $300,000 for 170 computers. Which means each computer cost $1,500. Seems awfully high. For that amount the school should be able to get two or three decent machines.
The Costs are BS by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:30 · Score: 0

I work in a setting where I support hundred of people and machines. Alone. 130,000 EU to clean malware? I could clean them for nothing besides my salary. What gives? If the ministry have support staff, they should be doing their jobs by removing the malware. It's not like its rocket science. Even if you have to re-image a machine, it's free, since you already have paid for licenses. It's time that is being spent, and the IT staff have been paid for their jobs.
IT spending is a sham, it really is. The kickbacks, license costs (theft), and just in general ridiculousness of rampant IT spending. Federal law there and everywhere should stipulate the least expensive solution (including free) that will reasonably do the job. If the secretaries and others need to learn a new OS, that will be good for them to learn something new. I'm tired of hearing about the poor end users and how they cannot learn anything new. Where I work, we simply handed them MacBooks and IPads and took their PCs. Uproar? To be sure. Now, three months later? Calm. Everyone is fine. No loss of productivity.
WebConverger by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:44 · Score: 0

Webconverger, or another appropriate LiveCD/LiveDVD - cost: media, support process: computer either needs reboot, plugging back in, hardware repaired, or user needs retrained. There are basically no other options.
WTF by SuperDre · 2013-04-30 00:51 · Score: 1

What kind of incompentent admin's do they have, how can you get to a 130.000 euro costs for cleaning up a f-ing virus.. They should fire all those people at their spots, even a f-ing IT-student could solve the problem.. What kind of moronic IT-department do they have.. And you wonder why we commoners are angry at our so called leaders, if they waste our precious taxmoney on stuff like this.. Getting serious people to do the job would save billions in tax money, seeing how money is wasted, 130.000 euro for cleaning up a virus on 170 PC's... geesh... somebody really does get rich with all those kind of goverment contracts...
Better uses. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:54 · Score: 0

They should at least donate the machines to a cause.
Computers for underprivileged children.
Use them to fold for home.
Give them to me.
It's the only way to remove a virus. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 00:57 · Score: 0

Computers are filled with flash memory: bios, network card firmware, HDD firmware, GPU card firmware, etc. Booting from clean media and formatting the HDD platters may not remove the virus. Any firmware can re-install itself to the diskdrive, either during or after the formatting or windows install.
The _only_ way to stop a virus is to not get infected. A polymorphic virus, possibly only existing in RAM while the computer is on, attached to some existing process, with higher system rights than virus scanners, is next to impossible to detect, let alone remove.
1. Re:It's the only way to remove a virus. by JDG1980 · 2013-04-30 01:14 · Score: 1
  
  Computers are filled with flash memory: bios, network card firmware, HDD firmware, GPU card firmware, etc. Booting from clean media and formatting the HDD platters may not remove the virus. Any firmware can re-install itself to the diskdrive, either during or after the formatting or windows install.
  Most of these infection vectors are merely theoretical at this point. Sure, there may have been proofs-of-concept, but not much in the wild. After all, a firmware-targeting worm would probably only work with one particular kind of chipset, while a worm that exploits one of the ten thousand vulnerabilities in Flash or Java can infect almost any Windows box. Malware writers these days are in it for the $$$, not the lulz; they want the biggest ROI.
  Anyway, the article (and summary) specifically states it was Conficker. That's just a Windows worm, and re-imaging the affected systems would fix it, no problem. If they need to recover data, then first boot from a LiveCD into a different OS and copy the required files to a flash drive or network share.
US Military throws new tools overboard by kn9sli001 · 2013-04-30 01:05 · Score: 2

The U.S. Government does this kind of thing on a regular basis. I personally have watched as hundreds of sets of socket wrenches and electronic devices ie. boom boxes, portable T.V.s and other brand new objects were thrown into the ocean, when I asked WTF? I was told the tools were cheaper to replace than ship them from Norfolk VA. to Jacksonville FL. When I asked why the boom boxes etc.I was told they were purchased for the ships store at overseas retailers and the paperwork would have been prohibitive because of having not paid taxes overseas. DEEP SIXXED in International waters. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
1. Re:US Military throws new tools overboard by dcw3 · 2013-04-30 07:30 · Score: 1
  
  Unless it was thirty plus years ago, I'm gonna call B.S. No Navy captain is going to risk his career on getting busted for throwing stuff overboard unless it's necessary to save the ship or someone's life.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
2. Re:US Military throws new tools overboard by kn9sli001 · 2013-04-30 11:18 · Score: 1
  
  Save your bullshit .1983 but don't delude yourself it's just following orders.
3. Re:US Military throws new tools overboard by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 14:59 · Score: 0
  
  So the guy above you was exactly correct, it did happen 30 years ago. You should apologize for your rudeness.
4. Re:US Military throws new tools overboard by dcw3 · 2013-04-30 16:14 · Score: 1
  
  Link a single credible source that indicates dumping by the U.S. Navy in recent years? I googled, and couldn't find one that didn't rely only on speculation or "someone told me". You'd think that with around 300 ships, someone somewhere would have snapped a photo.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
They just wanted new machines by GuB-42 · 2013-04-30 01:11 · Score: 1

The infection may be just the excuse they needed to upgrade. The cost of cleaning is probably just bullshit to push their argument.
Maybe not so stupid by Chrisq · 2013-04-30 01:17 · Score: 1

...how often do we get to make fun of Germany for making a boneheaded decision regarding technology?
From the summary, scrapping the PCs cost 190,000 Euros, and removing the virus cost £130,000 Euros. Given that activities like virus removal tend to overrun, and that there is a chance if it being ineffective that is at most 60,000 Euros for a lower risk.
Also, they probably took the opportunity to replace the servers with newer hardware, delaying the next hardware refresh cycle. If so this could just be another (annoying) example of German efficiency
1. Re:Maybe not so stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:25 · Score: 0
  
  From the summary they claim that removing the virus would cost 130,000 Euros. They also claim replacing 170 office computers costs 1100 Euro each.
  Both those numbers point either to huge kickbacks from computer vendor or to huge incompetence of IT dept.
2. Re:Maybe not so stupid by Mystakaphoros · 2013-04-30 02:00 · Score: 1
  
  i.e. even when the Germans are "stupid," they're really not very stupid about it. *sigh*
Why people loves harming themselves? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 01:34 · Score: 0

The only sane approach for untrained end users is virtual machines, either read-only or every night wiped away and restored from images on a server.
This for system and application, everything else is data and should be in a personal cloud where the mo**n can harm himself but not others, and communication with others should be allowed only through strictly controlled and very function limited channels.
Of course this is for L-users only, so the rest of the 1% of the population should keep using the system they prefer, store the data where they trust, don't forget backup, and stop litigating about what is the best system: if you are good at it the best system is what is best for what you have to do (you have to do some work, right?) otherwise no system is good!
What command.com means nowadays by tepples · 2013-04-30 01:35 · Score: 1

it took him three months to figure out how to reload command.com
Fortunately, learning about damage-free hanging solutions from the makers of Scotch tape is a bit easier now.
image anyone? by jjbenz · 2013-04-30 01:44 · Score: 1

I guess these guys never heard of imaging a machine via ghost, fog, etc...
"Fact": People who repair tech are "primitive" by retroworks · 2013-04-30 02:29 · Score: 1

German 3Sat.de television did a great story on how many Germans believe that people who buy used tech, especially Africans, must be burning them. Five studies ( posted here on /.) from organizations like Basel Convention Secretariat, IDC, USITC, etc. show that 85%-90% of used equipment purchased by Africans is reused in internet cafes, hospitals, and schools. But "Westerners" (in this case Germans) are so afraid of being accused of dumping they shred the equipment (forcing African geeks to buy in back alleys). This is just another example of a decade old defamation campaign about reuse.
A good organization serving as an "anti defamation league" for geeks of color http://www.fairtraderecycling.org/ has links to the 2011 German video, showing how German environmentalists would have kept the Green Revolution / Arab spring from ever happening.

--
Gently reply
Puppy Linux by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 02:41 · Score: 0

Maybe try setting up Puppy Linux for your dad. Just boot to the CD/DVD, then add in Firefox, Flash, and graphics driver (it autodetects which one). Then save the settings and everything to a $10 USB stick. Once that's done, he can boot up, start Firefox, and browse anywhere without virus problems. It's really quite easy to set up and even easier to use. (I am typing this from Puppy Linux right now.)
1. Re:Puppy Linux by RogueyWon · 2013-04-30 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  Not happening. Too much of the software he uses - productivity and entertainment - is Windows only.
Start Screen by tepples · 2013-04-30 03:01 · Score: 1

all of your old apps from XP/Vista/7 will run on Windows 8
True, some applications designed for Windows break on Wine, but I also seem to remember some applications designed for Windows XP breaking on Windows Vista, Windows 7, or Windows 8.

Linux is not "like" Windows except in a vague way in that they both offer a GUI with icons that you can click on. [...] You've clearly never worked with end-users before or have been involved in enterprise IT.
How have end users in enterprise environments been taking to the Start Screen of Windows 8? How is it "like" the older versions of Windows that boot to the desktop?
1. Re:Start Screen by KingMotley · 2013-04-30 05:30 · Score: 1
  
  True, some applications designed for Windows break on Wine, but I also seem to remember some applications designed for Windows XP breaking on Windows Vista, Windows 7, or Windows 8.
  Very very few applications don't run on Windows 8, none of which are in the top 200 most popular ones. They tend to be the applications that try to hook in deep into the system to bypass or monitor system things, like anti-virus software (Which you better have a more recent version of than a 5 year old version anyway), disk defraggers, and there are some device drivers that don't work as newer versions of Windows change the Device Driver interfaces, but there are usually newer versions of the device drivers anyway.
OS reinstall by phorm · 2013-04-30 03:08 · Score: 1

Segregate infected PC's, and do fresh installs in a sandbox. If the PC's are of the same make/model (or at least a small number of makes/models) all you really need is a single image per type, patched up with AV, and then to redo the lot of them. Hopefully they'd have a volume license for the OS/software...
But seriously, for most people OS reinstall=like-new PC, depending on the hardware age. Certainly no need to just toss the PC in the bin unless it's got really old hardware.
New machines by phorm · 2013-04-30 03:10 · Score: 1

People in threat waving around Fdisk and re-install media saying 'they could fix this
And just buying new machines solves those issues how?
1. Re:New machines by AdmV0rl0n · 2013-04-30 03:42 · Score: 1
  
  Where did I advocate buying new machines?
  I didn't.
  But to answer you dubious point, new machines nominally don't have some (but not all of it is answered so simply, weak passwords for example remain a problem unless that is addressed..) the bad baselines.
  
  --
  We`re all equal .. Just some of us are less equal than others.
Crap. Call me next time. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 03:18 · Score: 0

I'd have cleaned those 170 machines for $100 each, plus roundtrip airfare to Germany and a place to stay for a couple of weeks.
Re:"Fact": People who repair tech are "primitive" by cpghost · 2013-04-30 03:26 · Score: 2

Now that would explain why Germans had this "cash for clunkers" program where they mandated that EVERY committed car had to be physically destroyed, instead of being shipped to Africa, where it could still have worked 20+ years. This has always struck me as incredibly selfish and petty, like some young child which would destroy its used toys rather than give them to other children.

--
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
The important thing by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 03:32 · Score: 0

Someone in Germany who loves to look around trash dumps now has a really nice Beowulf cluster of these!
130000€ to clean them! by DNX+Blandy · 2013-04-30 03:53 · Score: 1

For 130,000€, I'll go over there right now and clean them all myself. Only 170 boxes so even if it takes a month, not really a problem eh.
welll... by smash · 2013-04-30 04:24 · Score: 1

Well, depending on tax law...
If the cost to replace is 190k, the cost to clean is 130k, and the machines are say, over 18 months old (i.e., book value depreciated by 50%), it is probably not worth cleaning them and just replacing with current hardware, OS, etc. Certainly of dubious value spending 60% plus of replacement cost in maintenance in any case.
If that sounds crazy - if you had a 30k car, and got slapped with a 20k service, you'd seriously consider fucking the car off, yes? Computers are no different.

--
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
$130,000???? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 04:38 · Score: 0

I could create a standard build of ANY OS, wipe and reload and still cost less that 2+ man years ($65,000/man year) effort. Assuming they are a model of German efficiency and they keep track of their software licenses, the software cost would have been $0 staying with the same OS. Whoever was running IT for that school should be fired. My .02.
Re:"Fact": People who repair tech are "primitive" by bussdriver · 2013-04-30 04:47 · Score: 0

The main purpose of that program (or selling point) was to get old dirty cars off the road; destruction of those cars was the point.

--
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
130,000 Euros for 170 boxes? WTF? by FuegoFuerte · 2013-04-30 05:54 · Score: 1

I can re-image a couple hundred servers in a day or two, easily, and have done so many times. Apparently I'm working for the wrong employer, if I can make 130,000 Euros for two days' work somewhere else. If it's a bunch of different hardware spread across multiple geographic locations, it could take a few weeks to get all the infrastructure in place and do all the testing, but I'd still be willing to take 130,000 EUR/month for that kind of job.
Come on! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 08:18 · Score: 0

I would've gladly gotten rid of their virus infection for 20k. Just run dban on all the PCs at the same time and then reinstall on all of them. Almost everything can be done simultaneously. Though it may take a little longer if not all the PCs use the same hardware, due to you having to find all the drivers required for each machine, in which case hire two or three other guys, also pay them 20k each and you are still paying less than 130k.
Seriously, it doesn't cost that much to fix this, it's just because they want to screw you over and get the most money possible. It seems to be a trend for governments to alway pay like 10 times more for something.
Planned obsolescence by tepples · 2013-04-30 08:31 · Score: 1

there are some device drivers that don't work as newer versions of Windows change the Device Driver interfaces, but there are usually newer versions of the device drivers anyway.
Unless the hardware manufacturer intentionally uses the incompatible driver model to force owners of otherwise perfectly working hardware to re-buy the hardware.
1. Re: Planned obsolescence by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 10:25 · Score: 0
  
  Which is less common than say, a hardware manufacturer not having Linux drivers.
I will help them! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-04-30 10:26 · Score: 0

If they send the infected hardware to me, I will pull out my sanitary brushes and disinfectant, and will 'decontaminate' the machines. Its a dangerous business disinfecting machines like this (not unlike dealing with radioactive waste), so I will have to keep the hardware once sent to me. Its dangerous work, but I am willing to undertake it as a free service to them. Oh, and only send the newest machines, the old ones you can keep.
Dummköpfen! They could have sent them to Muni by vandamme · 2013-05-01 06:00 · Score: 1

http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Comment-OpenOffice-s-Tale-of-Two-Cities-1760502.html
woaw woaw ... skjooz and also mee plz k thx by KingBenny · 2013-05-02 21:31 · Score: 1

here i am like euh unemployed and unable to get like a job doing dishes in the land of no portunity while everyone from small business owners and up with €100k or more gets targeted by a eu government that will still need 11 billion more afterwards because even after stealing all that money they still cant pay the first-aid bills since they spent too much and in the meantime their politicians ASK FOR A RAISE, RIGHT ?
that's like the apex of political trustbuilding and economic efficiency for starters, so here i am jobless, and capabale of running a virus scanner ...
and those people euh like ehm ... THROW AWAY computers that are infected because (i guess they don't have an IT-department then or they consist of list-reading helpdeskjockeys with little or no knowledge of anything but telemarketing and looking good ?)
because they estimate the cost to have them cleaned is 130k ? ???? 130k for virus removal on pc's from just one ministry?
i have had some work in governent instances before and i always wondered how any firm succeeds in billing that large and here it is again 130k ??? that gets you like euh at least 10 people employed for a whole year ... so are you telling me one decent guy can't get that fixed by himself anyway ?
now i am used to making do and making happen, and making something out of nothing never having had a lot of american sitcom type family to back me up but there is in this country about 22% young people and in spain and greece a LOT more who have this like hate-like thing developing that feeds on stuff like this and no one can imagine WHY ?

--
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
What they really should do with these computers by Anonymous Coward · 2013-05-03 04:41 · Score: 0

They should just send them all to me. :)
Failing that, they should sell them to people of the state; since they are the ones who originally bought them with taxpayer monies. They could just tell people that they will have to re-install since the machines are infected, or I suppose one command: del c:\windows\*.* would take care of telling people about re-installing - they'd simply have to at that point.
The only dumbass is you by Anonymous Coward · 2013-05-04 13:16 · Score: 0

1. It ain't their money --- the money is from the gummint
Which comes from where, exactly?

2. By throwing the thing away they save all the effort to reformat the disk and to re-install the Windows OS, plus softwares
Right, because manufacturing a new PC from scratch requires less energy than formatting a fucking hard drive.

3. With the computer dumped, they will get to enjoy newer computers --- again, the money came from the gummint
Which again, comes from where exactly?
Do us a favor, please: kill yourself.