Sick PCs should be banned from the net according to MS.

[computoman]

Good, Idea lets ban all MS machines and save a lot of trouble.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11483008

[tehboris]

Good:

Bot nets die faster

Bad:

ISPs call centers work load will quadrupedal or more.

Is it the ISP's responsibility to there customers to fix Microsoft's operating system?

[tokenuser]

In the war on drugs, the end user gets swept up in true madness, but it is the supplier that the Feds want. They want the big fish. Cut off the head and the body dies.

So, since all those bot nets are controlled by Linux based servers ... Go after the big fish and ban Linux. Nothing to control the bots and suddenly they do no damage.

[jd1138]

Microsoft could simply program their OS's differently. As in, have the OS have built-in malicious software detection tools, and if it detects a virus, then the OS will disable the networking TCP/IP drivers, so the infected PC won't be able to access the internet. Thus forcing the user to reload their OS or take it to a PC technician for repair, in order to be able to get back onto the internet.

I really don't see a problem with that. Having viruses is an error-state that needs to be corrected.

[tehboris]

Agree with point one (they kind of do a bit have built in malware detection, Vista & 7 have Defender by default, XP, Vista & 7 have MRT which runs occasionally).

Completely disagree with point two for two reasons. Firstly, an operating system that disables networking when it thinks it is infected? Really? So if some one su'ed up via SSH from a previously unknown IP and mapped ~.bash_history to /dev/null, you would rather disable networking all together than just log the event or send an email? Relay? So now your web server is off line and you and your users can't get any thing done with out a tech physically going to the box and fixing it?

The other problem is, malware writers would write there malware to re-enable networking after the OS disabled it and then disable the OS's ability to disable it again.

[phatlip]

I think Microsoft is on to something with this. It would really depend on how it's implemented though. Do you have any other stories that go into more technical details?

[computoman]

Typical of ms fanboys to blame ,ms non-robust software on someone else. You should not need all the extra software to keep ms safe. Besides most of it is worthless anyway, especially the one from ms. I agree that ISP's should not have to play malware traffic cop. I think isp's should file a class action suit against ms if they have to do so.

Who left ms an allegedly adjudicated monopy to play god. MS needs to clean up their own act and software before they go judging others.

What scares me is that there will be a license required to own a computer and only the rich elite will have one. Nothing more than knowledge slavery.

Microsoft had to use the "i'm a pc" campaign. What guy would want to say he was micro soft?

[jd1138]

"So now your web server is off line and you and your users can't get any thing done with out a tech physically going to the box and fixing it?"


Well the user can just stick the OS disc in and reload Windows, if they know how. Granted it is a pain in the arse. MS oughta just put an icon on the desktop that appears after you do a fresh install, and when you press it, MS automatically downloads all updates (with auto restarting/checking for add'l updates), and then MS will automatically download the latest antivirus definitions, turn on auto updates/firewall, and then automatically download all your favorite programs/utilities. Or just turn Windows into a self-healing OS. Almost like a living, organic thing.

But I understand your points completely. They are valid. It's a slippery slope.

[computoman]

"So now your web server is off line and you and your users can't get any thing done with out a tech physically going to the box and fixing it?"


Well the user can just stick the OS disc in and reload Windows, if they know how. Granted it is a pain in the arse. MS oughta just put an icon on the desktop that appears after you do a fresh install, and when you press it, MS automatically downloads all updates (with auto restarting/checking for add'l updates), and then MS will automatically download the latest antivirus definitions, turn on auto updates/firewall, and then automatically download all your favorite programs/utilities. Or just turn Windows into a self-healing OS. Almost like a living, organic thing.

But I understand your points completely. They are valid. It's a slippery slope.

Ubuntu a;ready has an icon to do that as most of the linux distros have done for years. If you have another system that is infected on the network, it may affect the machine you are updating and all is for naught. If ms made a robust os to begin with, mswindows users would not have half the trouble they do. I am surprised that lawyers have not seized on such an opportunity to sue ms in a class action suit for all the problems. People get sued for everything else inane. Companies could greatly slash their it budget if they did not have to deal with all that crap.

Years ago, one of the first viruses I saw for mswindows was one that locked msword files with a password. I was working at a college as an IT tech at the time and it was just before finals. Some students were in tears because they could not get their work finished to turn in. Some students even threatened to sue the school. The instructors gave students extensions till the issue was solved. Fortunately we found a fix rather quickly. I would have love to have some Microsoft people there especially his royal highness Billy Gates to see the students who were in tears . Maybe MS would have tried a bit harder to make their product better. All the donations that Bill Gates is making now can not make up for seeing students in tears. If he had any class, he should do something for them. That is right he dropped out of college, so why should he care.

[jd1138]

Well a lot of the problem with MS is that they have the largest market share, so they make the most attractive target to malware creators.

And MS cares too much about dragging along with them 30 years of legacy code for old hardware/software support -- which opens up many vectors for attack.

Windows needs a clean break/line in the sand to bring out a secure, clean and small OS for the consumer market. And then businesses can continue to use the old blob of code (Windows Classic) if they have to -- if they have old hardware/software that won't run on the newer OS. And most businesses have IT dept's to keep their systems clean of viruses. And if businesses do get viruses, these viruses wouldn't be able to propogate over to consumers who are running the newer/different Windows. And businesses can then work on updating their legacy equipment, so they themselves can move to the newer Windows OS.

[davmoo]

Typical of ms fanboys to blame ,ms non-robust software on someone else. You should not need all the extra software to keep ms safe. Besides most of it is worthless anyway, especially the one from ms. I agree that ISP's should not have to play malware traffic cop. I think isp's should file a class action suit against ms if they have to do so.

Spoken like a true Linux fanboy.

[computoman]

Unless there is a major corruption, only amateurs reload the os. Real techs fix the problem.

What does legacy equipment have to do with malware issues and or poorly written software???? Just because a new version comes out does not make the old version bad. Guess how many routers use legacy cpu's around the world. Linux supports 64bit machines in force. The 64 bit versions of linux do not support 32 bit systems aka legacy equipment. People need to get their facts straight. There are separate distros for that. If fact there are distros for most every cpu currently available. You can not say that about proprietary products.

Having been a Microsoft administrator and mswindows fanboy that managed thousands of machines for more than ten years, there are more important things to do than waste time on malware. Ironically Linux systems get attacked as much or more as anything else contrary to the rhetoric, 'nix systems are not perfect, but they do handle and have handled the job better to prevent issues so far.

It is a shame that the general public has such little real knowledge of Linux, BSD, and open source.

IBM dumped Microsoft off their desktops
Google dumped Microsoft off their desktops.
We dumped Microsoft off our desktops.
Should I go on....

If all people can do is call me names then, that shows how weak their argument is.

[tehboris]

Unless there is a major corruption, only amateurs reload the os. Real techs fix the problem.


How do you know the problem is fixed?

[tokenuser]

Unless there is a major corruption, only amateurs reload the os. Real techs fix the problem. My car recently had a Tech Bulletin released on it. It needed the ECM (Engine Control Module) reprogrammed. Basically it was a firmware upgrade that is now getting me an extra couple of MPG, and apparently lower emissions. The "amateurs" at the dealership didn't go in an fiddle with the parameters. They didn't remove or rename files. They reloaded the OS. It brings the ECM to a known state.

Same thing with a OS on a desktop computer. Sometimes you need to bring things back to a known state. A real tech will do that ... and then prevent the problem from happening again. The problem with diagnosing any desktop issue is that there are some many things that could have happened, that knowing what was a legitimate change and what was viral/malware can be next to impossible. At $X/hr to fix the problem, as a consumer it will be faster to rebuild than perform surgery.

It is a shame that the general public has such little real knowledge of Linux, BSD, and open source.

IBM dumped Microsoft off their desktops
Google dumped Microsoft off their desktops.
We dumped Microsoft off our desktops.
Should I go on....You could, but you would be factually wrong on IBM, and misleading on Google.

Here are some articles for you to read:
IBM Linux chief: Chasing desktop Windows a 'dead-end' (http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/09/21/linuxcon_2009_sutor_keynote/)
Linus calls Linux Bloated (http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/09/22/linus_torvalds_linux_bloated_huge/) ... and I love this quote Citing an internal Intel study that tracked kernel releases, Bottomley said Linux performance had dropped about two per centage points at every release, for a cumulative drop of about 12 per cent over the last ten releases.
Google to employees: 'Mac or Linux, but no more Windows (http://www.tuaw.com/2010/05/31/google-to-employees-mac-or-linux-but-no-more-windows/) ... hmm, not entirely the "dumping Windows for Linux" argument you were trying to imply.

[phatlip]

Google to employees: 'Mac or Linux, but no more Windows (http://www.tuaw.com/2010/05/31/google-to-employees-mac-or-linux-but-no-more-windows/) ... hmm, not entirely the "dumping Windows for Linux" argument you were trying to imply.

Google has a lot of engineers, so I'm sure a lot of employees are going to adopt Linux. But in general, Google is a big company who has other people besides engineers. I have no data to back this up, but I suspect there will be a significant number of Macs adopted on the Google campus. Apparently, they had a lot to begin with (per an article I read a few years ago).

[computoman]

There will always be people who will do something rogue. In a mswindows only environment, I ran linux where I used to work on secondary machines and some of my former coworkers still do on primary machines. The intent is still the guiding factor.


Here are some articles for you to read:
IBM Linux chief: Chasing desktop Windows a 'dead-end'
Linus calls Linux Bloated ... and I love this quote


Both comments are double edged.

Unfortunately there are programmers who have come into the linux community who are so by title only and it has made things more complicated. I raise havoc with ubuntu all the time about that. With seasoned linux programmers that is not so true about desktop incompatibilities.There does need to be a bit more discipline in linux development community. That being said I use several desktops and the same programs on all of them generally without issue. It is no worse than the browser wars between IE, Mozilla based and other browsers. Again no worse that to have to program for os/x, mswinows and linux at the same time. REAL programmers make it work It really disappoints me that MR Sutor allegedly has mswindows blinders on. I would like to know how much he has really ever used linux. Though I do not write code for os/x any more, I do use the same basic cdde for all the platforms I develop for. The sky is falling The sky is falling. Similarity breeds contempt and hinders innovation. Sorry Mr Sutor can not keep up.

I will take what linus said in general. That is true, but what the article does not say is that modules can be easily unloaded and or recompiled for the hardware you are using. I can get the source code to linux, but not for mswindows. The author tried to make it appear as if linus said that nothing can be done. Notice where the quotes are. Very misleading. Look at how many real time kernels are out there. I ran full debian linux on a cisco linksys nslu2 with only 32 meg of ram and a pentium I laptop with only 96 meg of ram. That laptop has since died, and I am using a free p3 to replace the nslu2. There are still distros popping up all the time that are now again supporting the legacy hardware. Obviously the author does not have a clue. Guess what most if not all your blue ray players, media boxes and tv's are running. Certainly not mswindows so far. MSWindows 7 barely runs on an old p4.

[computoman]

My car recently had a Tech Bulletin released on it. It needed the ECM (Engine Control Module) reprogrammed. Basically it was a firmware upgrade that is now getting me an extra couple of MPG, and apparently lower emissions. The "amateurs" at the dealership didn't go in an fiddle with the parameters. They didn't remove or rename files. They reloaded the OS. It brings the ECM to a known state.

Same thing with a OS on a desktop computer. Sometimes you need to bring things back to a known state. A real tech will do that ... and then prevent the problem from happening again. The problem with diagnosing any desktop issue is that there are some many things that could have happened, that knowing what was a legitimate change and what was viral/malware can be next to impossible. At $X/hr to fix the problem, as a consumer it will be faster to rebuild than perform surgery.


I am not saying that you should never reload the os, but "MOST" of the time it is just not necessary. In my many years as a mswindows tech I usually resolved most issues in under fifteen minutes without having to re-image a system. There are times when you just plain have to a re-image, but it should be a last resort . Been there done that. It is a combination of cost vs benefit. In a corporate environment where re-imaging tools are usually prevalent there is more cause to use that end. Certainly on a system as critical as an ecm, it should be re-imaged. Same goes true for a router, but then the time to re-image it should be minuscule compared to resetting up a desktop computer system, loading third party applications and then all the personal settings. Get real. I have also been in situations where re-imaging was not an option, you just have to fix it. Obviously yall have never been there.

With linux so far. I have not had to deal with all that viral crap. re-imaging only happens at hard disk replacement time. Experience tells you whether it is fixed or not.

[tehboris]

I am not saying that you should never reload the os, but "MOST" of the time it is just not necessary. In my many years as a tech I usually resolved most issues in under fifteen minutes without having to re-image a system. There are times when you just plain have to a re-image, but it should be a last resort . Been there done that. It is a combination of cost vs benefit. In a corporate environment where re-imaging tools are usually prevalent there is more cause to use that end. Certainly on a system as critical as an ecm, it should be re-imaged., but then the time to re-image it should be minuscule compared to resetting up a desktop computer system, loading third party applications and then all the personal settings. Get real. I have also been in situations where re-imaging was not an option, you just have to fix it. Obviously yall have never been there.

But you don't know you have fixed it, what about the undetectable backdoor the malware installed, did you fix that?

[computoman]

Even if you reload the machine, It still will not prevent and issue from recurring so you have wasted all that time and still not fixed the issue either. Once you have done enough machines you have a good idea where the problem is. Been there done that. Ninety five percent of the malware and viruses I have seen usually originate in just a few places place to clean up. Saves a lot of scanning time. Wished I had a dollar for each of all the registries I have looked at over the years.

[tehboris]

Even if you reload the machine, It still will not prevent and issue from recurring so you have wasted all that time and still not fixed the issue either.

Fixing the problem isn't prevention -.-

Fixing the problem is restoring the machine to a known good state where it was never infected and thus can be trusted once again.

[computoman]

if you just wipe the machine you do not know what the problem is or was. If you fix it then you know what the problem was and how to prevent it from happening again.......... Common sense.

[tehboris]

if you just wipe the machine you do not know what the problem is or was. If you fix it then you know what the problem was and how to prevent it from happening again.......... Common sense.

If you wipe a machine you don't need to know what the problem is. If you 'fix it' you might not have fixed it.

[computoman]

I know better because, I have seen it happen. Been there done that. When I fix something it stays fixed (so far).

[tehboris]

I know better because, I have seen it happen. Been there done that. When I fix something it stays fixed (so far).

I think you fail to understand some thing rather basic... when a computer has had malware on it, there is no way to know what the malware did, what other things it installed, what changes it made or if it did any thing at all.

Not knowing what the malware did, it is impossible to remove it or undo what it has done. For that matter, the vector of infection will, most likely, also remain an unknown, as such you probably can't fix that either.