ie8 fix
madison

Networking

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

You must be at least this secure to ride on the Internet

By | October 6, 2010, 3:50pm PDT

Summary: Isn’t it time to stop letting malware-infected PCs on the Internet? The answer is in Network Access Control.

My friend Richi Jennings is fond of the idea that users with malware-infected PCs should be cut off from the Internet. To this, I say not just “Yes,” but “Hell yes.” And, as he pointed out, other people are getting behind this idea of helping to clean up the litter of spam, malware, and distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks that junks up the Internet highway.

Comcast, as Jennings pointed out, will be letting imalware-infected users know that they’ve got garbage on their hard disk, but not keeping them off the net. Darn it.

Microsoft’s Corporate VP of Trustworthy Computing, Scott Charney, has just suggested, that “Just as when an individual who is not vaccinated puts others’ health at risk, computers that are not protected or have been compromised with a bot put others at risk and pose a greater threat to society. In the physical world, international, national, and local health organizations identify, track and control the spread of disease which can include, where necessary, quarantining people to avoid the infection of others. Simply put, we need to improve and maintain the health of consumer devices connected to the Internet in order to avoid greater societal risk. To realize this vision, there are steps that can be taken by governments, the IT industry, Internet access providers, users and others to evaluate the health of consumer devices before granting them unfettered access to the Internet or other critical resources.”

In other words, if your device isn’t protected, sorry, you can’t go on the Internet. I find this more than a little ironic coming from a Microsoft executive. After all, Windows is the host for 99.4% of all malware according to G Data, a German IT security company. That’s sounds about right.

So, logically, the best thing to do would be to ban Windows from the Internet! OK, while I can get behind that idea, that’s not going to happen.

So what can we do? Well, for starters, ISPs could start including language in their Acceptable Usage Policies (AUP) that if a user’s devices can be shown to be actively sending spam, participating in DDoS , or otherwise causing a nuisance, the ISP can lock down their account until they get the malware off their PC.

And how would they do that? They’d use NAC (Network Access Control).

In companes, NAC technology makes sure that before any end user’s computer or any other endpoint, is only allowed on the corporate network the computer must prove that it complies with the company’s security policies. So, you could lock out say PCs that don’t have the latest IT-blessed patches or the latest updates for the corporate anti-virus program.

There are multiple NAC approaches already out there. Some of the more important of these are Cisco’s Secure Access Control System, the Trusted Computing Group’s TNC (Trusted Network Connect PDF Link) and Microsoft’s NAP (Network Access Protection). There are also many others for any size company or ISP.

The way companies use NAC would never fly on the Internet, but then, we wouldn’t be requiring users to prove that their systems are safe, or safer anyway. We’d only be using NAC to lock down hardware that’s already showing itself to be an Internet litterbug. Until the system can prove that it’s now behaving itself, it can stay locked down in in a VLAN (virtual LAN) jail where the only sites they can get to are the ones explaining to them-in very simple terms-what they need to do to get rid of their problem.

I don’t know about you, but I like this plan. What do you think folks?

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, aka sjvn, has been writing about technology and the business of technology since CP/M-80 was the cutting edge, PC operating system

Disclosure

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols is a freelance writer. He does not own stocks or other investments in any technology company.

Biography

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, aka sjvn, has been writing about technology and the business of technology since CP/M-80 was the cutting edge, PC operating system; 300bps was a fast Internet connection; WordStar was the state of the art word processor; and we liked it.

His work has been published in everything from highly technical publications (IEEE Computer, ACM NetWorker, Byte) to business publications (eWEEK, InformationWeek, ZDNet) to popular technology (Computer Shopper, PC Magazine, PC World) to the mainstream press (Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, BusinessWeek).

63
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: You must be at least this Secure to ride on the Internet
JACOBSONR 14th Oct
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.
0 Votes
+ -
Agree with a caveat
endermc12 6th Oct 2010
I can get behind your proposal, but I think we will need to come up with a simpler way to clean out/clean end user's PCs. I would have no problem cleaning out Malware if a server detected that I was infected. But what would my grandparent's do? And don't say get a Mac or have them run Ubuntu, that just isn't realistic for everyone.

I worry that un-savvy folks would just be paying for internet access that they can't use AT ALL.
@endermc12 Got an easy answer for you... put a router between the internet and your Grandparent's computer...
0 Votes
+ -
And...
ALISON SMOCK 16th Oct 2010
@gjleger@...

Get them a good AV/AM package for FREE:
http://TechReview.LIEconomy.com
Finally somebody making a noise on how to ease the hazard of connecting to the Internet.
When a law is enacted outlining that the propagation of malware is against the National Interest then things will move much faster.
Does the internet mean so little to generating wealth and security (of this country) that no minimum standard is required for either the equipment connected to it or the use of it?
@Agnostic_OS
Great idea. Pass a law against it. Can I even count the number of unenforceable laws on the books. What are you going to do to violators, send out the FBI to arrest Granny Smith. It is a technical problem and needs a technical solution. This one has to be managed by the ISPs. They are the ones providing access.
0 Votes
+ -
ISP's partly to blame
djcoderman 6th Oct 2010
I run into plenty of people who have the Ethernet cable co directly from the cable modem to the back of their computer without even "linksys" in between. It is that way because they asked for "installation" and some cable guy showed up and plugged in the wires.
@djcoderman
The ?cable guy" is not responsible for anti-virus software, and the cable company often requires the direct link when installing. Some of the ISPs do offer anti-virus software, but it is up to the customer to install it.
@djcoderman,

A lot of the DSL and Cable modems are router combos with build in firewalls.
@bmonsterman

Well, that's a bit of stretch, though. NAT isn't really a firewall. Still, it's better than nothing, and lots of people get nothing.
0 Votes
+ -
First step is to get all linux machines off the internet since the OS itself is insecure and with leaving the telnet open and built in smtp servers its the main vector for all the malware you see today. The psyb0t isn't helping either with its flooding of routers. Once this step is completed you'll have less infected machines on the internet and will see faster bandwith.

Some ISP's have already started blocking infected machines. I've had a few reports of roadrunner blocking internet access until the machine that is infected is cleaned up.
@Loverock Davidson
Your perception of reality is backwards..

BTW its windows 2000+ that have telnet built in and exchange server that relays a lot of spam.
0 Votes
+ -
@Anthony E
And in Ubuntu if port 23 is open run terminal and issue the command -
sudo ufw deny 23 ............ the firewall has it blocked
sudo ufw allow 23 ............ to put it back.
sudo ufw status verbose ............. to see the status.
@Agnostic_OS
Thats if you want to enable the telnet port but no distro even uses telnetd, its been sshd for about 6+ years..
0 Votes
+ -
Totally disingenuous, intentional misinformation, troll bait
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate 7th Oct 2010
@Loverock Davidson
Have more DayQuil.
@everyone else

Everything Loverock says is wrong. Perhaps we can all just flag him and stop replying.
@Loverock Davidson

Aww, aren't you a cutey? You must be the resident troll, who posts outrageous statements to get attention. Everybody, did you see the troll? Say hi, let it know you're watching! :-D
@enderland@... LOL. he's actually the famous Apple fanboi troll.
0 Votes
+ -
Just in case there is anyone out there who seriously is not aware of the lack of veracity of the statements in this post.

Telnet is considered obsolete for general use and is not even installed on any modern Linux distribution.

The replacement for telnet, ssh, is not installed by default on most Linux distributions, and is much more secure than telnet even when present.

Almost no Linux desktop distributions install an smtp (mail server) program by default, and even if one is present, it's no indication of a lack of security.

Roadrunner actually does block spam sending machines, although they're not exactly on top of things when it comes to their reaction time. My brother got a malware infection (trojan based) on a computer in the basement of my home which turned it into a spambot (Microsoft Internet Explorer was the only existing software required). I quickly found out about the issue, and had it cleaned up within a couple of days. A couple of weeks later at the end of the month, long after the machine had been disinfected, Time Warner cut off my Internet access because of the infection that had been on the machine. Their information is not exactly in real time. It was easy to get it reactivated, but the slow motion response was rather amusing.
0 Votes
+ -
Teach a man to fish
KineticArtist 7th Oct 2010
Most hardware read computer sellers and ISPs dont in any instance provide any education or software on protecting your new PC and by proxy the ISPs network. Some do but its usually substandard antivirus with no malware or adware or trojan capabilities We could also enact laws that make spam so unbelievably expensive if caught via fines We could also teach new users or hell at least give a skills test to computer buyers and if they fail give them some free lessons on protecting your machine. The AV and spybot software makers could subsidize it but definetly if you get caught with a infected machine kick your ass off the internet till you are healthy again. But then again we live in a world where parents Knowingly send their sick kid to school to infect the rest of their classmates....
Let's see; $200+ for a computer; $55 a month for internet access and now we want to add $X to let me keep my $55 a month expense? Sounds like a recipe for switching to Linux to me...
@danny@... You can secure a computer running Windows very easily with freeware, doesn't have to cost a cent.

Not securing your computer can really get expensive, though; especially for the less technically adept who have to hire a professional to get the machine working again after it's been crippled by malware, but also due to the possibility of having your bank account cleaned out or your identity stolen.

Linux is good, but still requires some attention to security.
0 Votes
+ -
How about the ISPs take some responsibility!
PeterBoyles Updated - 7th Oct 2010
First major issue, if I have one infected system and 10 good systems on my home network are they turning my entire connection off (cause they sure can't block a specific system across my router NAT)? Also, how are they going to determine which system of 11 is infected? And how am I going to remediate when in general that requires connectivity? This is not thought out at all. I rate the article as 2 out of 10.

Instead, let's have ISPs filter any malicious items before they reach us. Also, they should block any IPs that serve or manage mal-ware.

What's that you say? It violates the mal-ware creators' rights?

Schemes like this have major potential for abuse
or "inadvertently" cutting off people without any issues. So, unless they can guarantee that there will be zero (0) miss-identified machines...

A better option, if you ID an infected computer is to block the bad traffic. And go after the distribution and control sites
@PeterBoyles : If ISPs would just VALIDATE the source of the e-mail AS they receive it, then forgeries could get dropped on the floor. But ISPs won't even do that much; in fact, they often do nothing during the connecton phase and if they do send a warning/whatever, they are then creating new-mail for a mail they never should have accepted. It is NOT hard to do; but most ISPs are dumbos and have no idea how to do it, or how to ask how to do it. ISPs could stop spam, malware and all forged mail almost overniight if they wanted to. They don't want to. And if you talk to them all you get is excuse after excuse why they don't want to do it. I even TOLD three of them how to do it!
@PeterBoyles

You're not making sense. ISPs aren't reading every packet. They often don't really know which packets are "bad". It would be more like Yahoo telling your ISP that your IP is the source of a lot of spam. So,

"Also, they should block any IPs that serve or manage mal-ware." Puts you back in the same boat you were in when you wrote this message.
0 Votes
+ -
Users vs. Power users
luckyducky7@... 7th Oct 2010
If I'm smart enough to avoid a.) surfing for porn and b.) not clicking on any attachment in an e-mail, as well as scanning any suspicious files with a one-time install of an antivirus program, there's no need for me to run an antivirus program.

I don't want any internet provider deciding what is and is not secure (for example, if they decide that their security software only runs on Windows and bans all other systems, e.x. Linux and OSX). If I see the need for an antivirus program, it's going to be one I choose, and I want to install it on my own terms- not have anybody force it on to me.

As for the VPN "jail" idea, you can bet that you'll see "Your computer does not appear to be running the correct OS for our security suite. Please purchase and install a licensed copy of Windows 7 and try connecting again."

Or, this message:
"Our servers have detected a banned program on your computer. Please uninstall this program before accessing the Internet." This banned program could be anything- like using a BitTorrent client (for legitimate purposes anyways) that the network doesn't want you using.

As I recall, this is why a certain vaccine for a certain disease is not mandatory/given at birth- because certain people are sensible enough to avoid it!

I DO NOT want a system where I have to pass a test to get a license to use a computer.
@luckyducky7@...

Vaccines are required to attend schools. Kids are definitely not very clever about avoiding germs. HOWEVER, we get to that point by have a competent third party that retains the public trust. Comcast already abused their customers by restricting bittorrent traffic. They can't be trusted not to block Skype and Hulu to force you to use their products instead, or to block any legitimate creative use of the bandwidth the user pays for(It's not unethical/illegal for a company to try to make money. They could for instance divvy up a 100Mb/s pipe amongst 50 users for 2Mb/s apiece. It's illegal/unethical when sell 20Mbps to 60 users and then they persecute people that use more than 2Mbps).
@tkejlboom

Yeah, I remember, I had to take the measles vaccine 3 times... caught the measles every time.
Had to take the polio vaccine twice.
Somewhere along the line, I stopped listening to "experts".

There's a wide gap between safeguarding the LIVES of children and protecting computers. Computers can be replaced.
@luckyducky7@...

hooray!
Hi Steven,

I read your link from G Data Software that says about 99.4% of malware affects Windows. On the more detailed pdf it says .NET malware attacks account for a small part of those, but they are on the rise (increased by a factor of 3.4).

I'm using openSUSE 11.2 and I installed Mono to be able to use Banshee. Do you think there is an increased security risk from this, even though I am not using Windows?

Thanks.
0 Votes
+ -
I think it's a fine idea if ISPs want to block systems that are obviously attacking other machines, or being used as spam proxies. Almost every ISP already has a TOU policy which allows this, so the only change needed is one of enforcement. MS can also do it themselves, as their EULAs say that they own administrative access to Windows machines. Go ahead MS, work with the ISPs and kick them off!

But I think that MS's call for government intervention is one of the most profoundly stupid ideas I've ever heard.
@IT Security Geek

They block my access, they stop getting my money.
0 Votes
+ -
microsoft?
sportmac 7th Oct 2010
microsoft is talking about this? please. at what point are they held responsible for holes in their software?
if you drive a car and tend to get drunk a lot they take your license away. if you make a car that is defective and causes accidents they recall them or the government steps in.
0 Votes
+ -
Name 1
Dr. John 7th Oct 2010
@sportmac Name one operating system that doesn't have a hole in it. Just one. Then, without hesitation, I, and everyone else, will know you're either liar or moron.

The car analogy, isn't. It's a red herring. It's an useless argument in that there is no comparability.

While you're on your witch hunt, why not include camera makers, since they're misused, outside the control of the manufacturer, to make child porn? Why not the makers of kitchen counter tops, since misusing them leads to food poisoning and/or injury?

Don't you people think before you post?
0 Votes
+ -
Sounds good to me
thebaldguy 7th Oct 2010
Every time I go through my Gmail spam folder to see if anything worthwhile has been snagged, I say silent prayers to St. Bill, for forcing the world to run Windows for a little while, and to St. Loverock, who is almost as excited about that development as St. EdBott.
I spend all day, every day, cleaning user PCs of malware. I can't remember the last time something bad came directly via email. Malware comes from malicious sites that display a simple message that the PC has a virus (even though it doesn't) and "click here to run a scan (or a fix)". Non-savvy users click. Why can't the ISPs or the antivirus producers, scan incoming web pages for this sort of malware? This will help those non-savvy users.
0 Votes
+ -
This whole post is a troll
Dr. John 7th Oct 2010
There's no other reasonable excuse for its existence. It's got to be a troll. No one with two functioning brain cells is going to think this a good idea.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: You must be at least this Secure to ride on the Internet
Alex G. (DV411) Updated - 7th Oct 2010
One of the ways to fix the problem, by taking away the administrative access, is already happening with app-driven devices: cell phones, iPads, game consoles, TV boxes. The vast majority of home computer use is gaming and browsing - i.e. something that does not require administrative privileges ever. Give it a couple of years, and there will be little use to old-fashioned home computers - game consoles, restricted access tablets (iPads, e-readers) and TV boxes will take over. End of problem.

In the meantime - take the dangerous clunkers off the streets - in other words, cut the pipe for p@wned computers and open relays.
@Alex G. (DV411) ]

As I've been saying, turning your computer into a dumb internet terminal. Worse, turning it into an appliance like a t.v. or a radio, with all control at the producers end.
We'll view what they want us to view, play what they want us to play (for a fee, of course!) and surf what they want us to surf.

Us Homer Simpsons are too dumb to be free.
0 Votes
+ -
Actually, no, they're not.
Dr. John 7th Oct 2010
@tkejlboom Actually, vaccines are not required to attend school. They try to tell you they're required, but they're not.
Government regulation of computer and network security is an absolute necessity and in fact is already in full force for e-commerce, business and healthcare IT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber-security_regulation). It's only a matter of time before regulation and enforcement reaches personal computers. Calling it a "stupid idea" is akin to distributing shopping carts to Taliban while on a tour of a dynamite factory.
@Alex G. (DV411)

Why is it an absolute necessity?

"Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question." - Thomas Jefferson

If anything, the bureaucrats who work for governments have constantly demonstrated how incompetent and corrupt they are. And yet, there are... people... like you who want to entrust more and more of our lives to them.

To heck with them and with you.

If the internet is toooo dangerous for your poor little computer, the answer is for you to get the heck off it, not to straightjacket other peoples' access to it!
I love this attitude.

It's not YOUR internet. I'm PAYING money for my access to the internet. And while I take as many precautions as I can, I'm not an IT expert.

Screw the lot of you authoritarian-minded jerks. When I pay for something, I'll use it as I see fit. When YOU pay for my internet, then YOU can determine what OSes I use, what hardware I use (when you pay for the OSes and hardware, too!), and what access to the internet I have.

This collectivist mindset has GOT TO GO. It is completely incompatible with America (I can only hope the authoritarian jerks are benighted foreigners who haven't a clue what "individual liberty" is all about).
A lot of it has to do with the ever decreasing margins on personal computers. Trust me. I know. 13 years ago people would be fine spending a little more on good virus protection, and with the large margin, I often ran through for 30 minutes or even installed at their house their new computer. Enter the big mass merchants who just want to move boxes. Margins have crumbled, and now I CANNOT include AV as part of the deal, although luckily I can convince quite a few to purchase it extra, and there is CERTAINLY no margin for me to spend time with the customer.

I guess my opinion is a bit sour grapes, but I do believe because the personal touch has gone out of selling a computer, the customer gets home with an unprotected PC and no real understanding of the dos and donts of clicking on those cool free little icons promising them a free iPad or somesuch. You won't believe some of the stuff I see on people's computers.

Sad days.
I think you are going after the wrong targets. Go after the hackers, etc. that are creating all the junk malware/spyware/viruses/etc. Keep them off the internet. Many users that are infected are often not very knowledgable in the ways of computers and the internet. The bad guys are often international in their scope and post lots of junk via the internet. If you stop them it would be equivalent to the elimination of Smallpox .
JCHJimbo
This is all fine in theory, but first of all, I would need a list of good, up to date, free AV-software that is always up to date no matter what.
Same goes for anti-malware software.
Then I must at least have a certain time to download those on my brand new - unprotected - Windows box, which can easily be infected during that process.
It doesn't help to buy a boxed version because the CD/DVD is never up to date. Once more I must go online to update those packages, but in the meantime any new unknown virus can infect my system, locking me out.
So it is a catch22 here. In order to protect myself I must go online, but I cannot go online to get the data to protect myself.
Basically it comes down to Windows providing me with an OS that is virus and malware proof out of the box, no matter what new threats will be released on the Internet.

Wamukota
Your article missed a very important (and sneaky) little point. Both Mr. Charney & Mr. Mundie have been spewing this idea, but with an additional item. M$ wants the government to certify the computers that connect to the Internet. They also suggested the government tax the consumer on patches necessary to install to fix their computer so that it complies with the government certification. We all know where M$ is going with this. It's one more attempt by M$ to lock out competition, (i.e. Mac & Linux), and to have security patches paid for by our tax dollars. While it may sound like a great idea to disinfect our Internet from ill-behaved computers; ISP's already are filtering content, and will block a user from send Smurf & DDOS attacks. Beware of M$, and keep the government out of our computers.
I believe Microsoft has come up with the idea, a great idea that should wake up the many Windows users with infested PC's and may be also wake up Microsoft to problems they themselves have not addressed. May be they are saying that only Windows PC's should be allowed on the internet?
What about Windows servers?
0 Votes
+ -
ISP motivation?
support@... 8th Oct 2010
Let's imagine that there is an ISP out there that is progressive enough to do this. How do they spin it in a way that rewards their increased costs with increased subscribers?

"Using our new secure technology, we can protect the Internet by blocking your access to your stock ticker and critical websites when we find you've been hacked..."

Not likely to win many.

So, because my child was careless, you can block me from what I think is important? That's great for the "Internet", but unfortunately, the "Internet" doesn't owe the ISP one red cent. It's not at all likely to win any new subscribers except all but the most altruistic 'net denizens, who really want to keep the Internet clean.

Basically, the ones who are in the best position to apply and implement this technology are among those with the least incentive to do so. Unfortunately, this is where Government Legislation is required, because that's the only way this sort of thing can be implemented and still keep the playing field level.
0 Votes
+ -
Big Brother? I don't know...
flapinux 8th Oct 2010
If it was regulated to only disallow known malware, virus, etc. I'd be ok with it, but who's to say the ISP wouldn't force me to uninstall utorrent to use the internet? I am remembering the day I bought serious sam II only to to install it & have it deny me access to the game until I uninstalled Alcohol 120%. I promptly returned it.
All your computers are belong to Microsoft! They ownz the interweb don't you know? I keep reading everyone writing these little analogies about how if you had a real life infection you'd be quarantined etc etc. How about this analogy, my website is my virtual shop in the online world, I provide Computer Repairs in Taunton so my potential customers may have viruses, I don't have any inclination to stop those people getting to my house. I'd loose money. Microsoft, get orf my lawn.
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix