Tech Broiler

Jason Perlow and Scott Raymond

Personal Computer Security: Using Uncommon Sense

By | August 27, 2010, 10:39pm PDT

Summary: There’s a lot of people out there that want your personal and financial information for unethical reasons. Learn how to protect yourself.

The internet is an unsafe place. Your data is at risk. Your right to privacy is being violated. Your identity is going to be stolen, your credit ruined, your career destroyed, your house burned down, your fields will be defiled and your women will be pillaged. Dogs and cats, living together! Mass hysteria!

The net has become a bleak place for people that do not practice safe computing methods. Cybercrime is big business these days–it’s no longer the domain of a surly miscreant in a basement writing viruses that infect floppy disks. Now the bad guys are organized, smart, and running their operations like a big business.

Most people are aware of the dangers, but not how to protect themselves. The truth is, if a hacker wants to get into your system, usually the only way to prevent that access is to completely cut the system off from the internet. Even then, there’s still a remote possibility that access can be gained. Just recently, the US Department of Defense reported that a successful network intrusion had been accomplished through the use of a rogue USB flash drive.

On a smaller scale, cyber thieves are interested in capturing information about you: your credit cards, social security number, banking information. The intent is obvious, of course. The worst part is that many security attacks can come from known friends whose own systems have already been compromised.

While it is true that some computer operating systems are more secure than others–Microsoft Windows being the most vulnerable by virtue of its ubuquity and therefore interest to criminals–no one system is 100% safe. The majority of security violations can be pinned squarely on the shoulders of human error, through inattention, ignorance and even apathy.

There are a number of precautions a computer user can take in order to start securing their data. Anti-virus and anti-malware applications are a good start. If you run a Windows system, Avira AntiVir Personal is a decent, free option. Microsoft has also released a good, free antivirus package called Microsoft Security Essentials. I would also recommend using Malwarebytes’ Anti-Malware to scan your system on a regular basis. It has been known to catch things other applications miss.

While Linux and Mac users are fairly safe from virus infection, they can still run Windows in a virtual machine, and can pass along infected files. The open source ClamAV is available in both Linux and Mac versions.

Good security practices involve multiple layers of protection. If you have a hardware firewall, use it. Block any inbound ports that are not in use. Use network address translation (NAT) so that the network address of your computer is masked from the outside world. Unless you run a server at home, you won’t need to have the firewall forward ports back to your computer from the outside.

If you don’t have a hardware firewall, use the one built-in to your operating system. All modern versions of Windows, OSX and Linux have firewall options.

That’s just scratching the surface. There’s so much on the internet today designed to trap the unwary cyber traveler. Junk email is filled with lottery and inheritance scams, fake file attachments with trojans that can take over your computer, links to websites infested with malware and code that attacks your web browser. Most email providers already filter out the worst of these, or provide you with tools to do the same. Modern email clients usually block infected file attachments.

The motto of “better safe than sorry” really does apply here. If you don’t know who it’s from, delete it. Don’t open file attachments unless you are sure of their origin. Don’t accept instant message chat from strangers. Stay off of unsavory websites–porn and software piracy websites are notorious for being havens for malware.

It’s recommended that if you have no alternative to visiting unknown websites, use an ad blocker like Ad Muncher which works with all browsers, or free options like Adblock Plus for Firefox and Chrome. Please keep in mind, however, that many legitimate websites are paid for through the use of ad revenue–so as a courtesy to them, disable the ad blocking while visiting those sites.

As I mentioned earlier, one of the biggest issues with computer security is the human element. Hackers use social engineering to crack security. Notorious hacker Kevin Mitnick has said that it’s quite easy to simply call up a random low-level person in a company, tell them you’re from the IT department and ask for their username and password. Many people will just hand over this information without even thinking twice about it.

Your passwords are supposed to be kept private, just like your ATM PIN that you use to get cash at the bank. Never give your password to anyone. Never make it easy to guess, like your own name or a pet’s name. Don’t put it on a Post-It note and stick it to your monitor. And if anyone ever asks for it, don’t give it to them.

A common scam is called phishing, where someone sends a legitimate-looking email that appears to come from your bank, asking you to provide your account number, your ATM pin, your username and password. Or sometimes they provide a fake website link that appears to go to the banking website, but is actually one made to appear like your bank website but is only there to siphon your credentials so they can empty out your account. Do not respond to these emails, and do not click on the links in them.

Another trap to avoid are the TV commercials promoting a faster computer free of viruses and spyware. These are actually ransomware scams where the program doesn’t actually clean anything, but keeps demanding money to keep your computer safe. The parent company also theatens anyone that reviews them in a negative light, which is why I have not named them directly in this article. Not surprising, considering their reputation. There are many malware programs pretending to protect your security; research them first before using any of them.

Let’s face it, with computers come risk. If you have information on them that others would find valuable, inevitably someone will try to take it from you. The alternative is to completely cut yourself off from all network and computer access and never put any personal information on one. The only problem with that is there are many companies out there with your personal info, and the news has seen plenty of stories over the past 20 years where customer information was leaked or stolen.

The threat of data and identity theft will always exist. The best thing to do is to be safe, be careful, and be smart.

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

Topics

Scott Raymond has been a technologist and system administrator for over 25 years.

Disclosure

Scott Raymond

I am the IT Manager for a high end audio and network systems integrator in northern Califronia. My wife works at Adobe Systems, Inc. Whenever I write an article that might involve Adobe or its products, I add a disclaimer at the top of the article to make sure she is not involved in any way. We have a small bit of stock with AT&T and no other major investments that would cause conflict.

Biography

Scott Raymond

Scott Raymond has been a technologist and system administrator for over 25 years. Starting as a hobbyist in his teens, Scott quickly learned that he could translate his passion and knowledge into a full-time career. He currently works as the IT Manager for a high end audio and network systems integrator in northern California. He has written technology articles for various publications in the past and began contributing to ZDnet as a guest blogger on Jason Perlow's Tech Broiler. Scott and Jason met in New York in the 1990s where they co-managed the New York City Palm Pilot Users' Group.

In his spare time, Scott is a trained chef and avid bicycling enthusiast, as well as a voracious reader of historical, science and horror fiction. He is a huge fan of pop culture, with a wide range of interest in TV shows, movies and games.

75
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Personal Computer Security: Using Uncommon Sense
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
+ -
Be safe.
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate Updated - 28th Aug 2010
Hi Folks,

This message is directed at users of Windows and Windows IT Administrators.

If you've become sickened by the unrelenting security issues that turn up each and every day (one need only stop by ZDnet's Zero-Day blog and read), things may seem desperate but there is hope.

While MS continue to apply due diligence (questionable) in addressing vulerabilities/exploits with out-of-band patches and monthly Tuesday patch cycles, that still is not enough to keep the n'er do wells away.

The most recent incident highlights the true severity of Microsoft's Windows security predicament:

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9182238/Rootkit_with_Blue_Screen_history_now_targets_64_bit_Windows?source=rss_news

Now, Windows 7 64-bit is proven to be exploitable (Zero-Day, no patch in site) by the Alureon root kit.

A root kit is the worst of possible scenarios one can encounter in terms of to what extent a PC can become compromised or 'owned'.

This comment might spawn the reflexive to say all O/Ses are vulnerable to root kits. Indeed, this is true.

But, unfortunately, the situation for Windows 7 is such that there isn't a way for its kernel to 'police' or effectively stop a buffer overflow from attempting to inject a DLL into the kernel's memory space.

All of this has been written up and most recently there are even some 200 estimated Apps which run on top of Windows 7 which are subject to a DLL exploit on all versions of Windows.

So, what is the remedy? Microsoft, not a third-party vendor, should develop and provide an API with hooks to an external security module interface that couples up and binds to the kernel at boot time which allows the user/admin to set up predefined or user-customizable Application mandatory-access-control profiles.

Such a profile when present and running in the kernel mac security module would be the final 'permission-giver' for a granular set of actions that the App, and, this is important, the KERNEL takes on behalf of the App process id.

Microsoft has not provided this very much needed facility.
They indeed have done a lot of work to 'sandbox' their own in-house development, specifically the newest Microsoft Office 2010 will sandbox its family of Apps.

But as far as all other 3rd-party Applications, there is no such sandbox externel module that can be called on each discrete action and approved by the security module, even the actions taken by the kernel on behalf of the App.

So, I submit to you that while Microsoft's due diligence is put into question, Linux offers precisely this much needed additional security 'policing' or 'cross-check' on what an App is doing at any moment in time.

It is called Linux Security Module (LSM).
There are several LSM modules which are present in various Linux Distributions, including SELinux, GrSecurity, AppArmor, and the like.

If you truly demand a maximum of security and analyze the Windows security for what it is, you will reach the conclusion (an obvious one) that the general design of Windows 7 security is lacking per the above LSM explanation and therefore is deficient.

Please make time to allow a full investigation of the alternatives and consider Linux for its superior security.

May I recommend you please consider Canonical's Ubuntu Linux 10.04 LTS, which includes AppArmor LSM by default.

Ubuntu Linux: The safest operating system on the planet.
I stake my reputation in it.

Thank you Scott for a nice sensible write-up (and funny).
0 Votes
+ -
Great post!
NonZealot Updated - 28th Aug 2010
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate

May I recommend you please consider Canonical's Ubuntu Linux 10.04 LTS, which includes AppArmor LSM by default.

I personally went the Kubuntu and SuSE routes, tried them for a year, and found them to be good. After a year of booting back into Windows every time I wanted to run a Windows program, then booting back into Linux every time I wanted to check email and surf the Internet, I said "Enough".

If you don't need to run a single Windows program, Linux is great. It truly is. It isn't perfect like Dietrich makes it out to be but it works well for the most part. If you need to bring out Wine, virtual machines running different OSs, or even dual boot into a different OS as a daily part of getting your work done though, you need to ask yourself if you picked the right OS. An OS is a platform and if your programs don't work on your platform, you have a problem.

Ultimately you need to ask yourself if the trouble you are putting yourself through by forcing your applications to run on platforms they weren't designed to run is greater than the trouble you are putting yourself through trying to stay secure on the platform that was designed to run your applications. For the extremely naive and those who have absolutely no common sense, Linux might end up being more secure considering that 99% of all Windows malware is willingly installed by the user.

For the rest of us, remember that the number of people running Windows with no malware issues outnumbers the entire Linux desktop community by several orders of magnitude. For every Linux user running without any malware, there are 10s or 100s of Windows users running without any malware. We do exist out there and there are many more of us than Dietrich will ever admit to.
0 Votes
+ -
NonZealot: Here's what I do
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate 28th Aug 2010
@NonZealot

Now, mind you I have Ubuntu 10.04 LTS running (UNE) on an Acer Aspire One D260 Netbook.

I put VirtualBox on it and installed Windows XP into it so that when at work (behind a Firewall) or over our SonicWall VPN I can do my Office work with needed Windows App.

So, you can have the best of both worlds really.

And I iconified the VirtualBox XP VM and it spins up in just 3 seconds from suspended mode and runs in VirtualBox's transparent mode, in other words, it behaves as just 'another app' on the Ubuntu Desktop.

Thanks!
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Best of both worlds?
NonZealot 28th Aug 2010
What is this second world that I'm getting the best of? I'm getting the best of the Windows world by running Windows 7. I'm still not seeing how installing a totally different OS and keeping up with patches on that OS, installing a VM, then installing a 10 year old OS and keeping up with patches on that second OS, gives me something better than what I have right now: a safe, secure, modern OS that runs all the applications I want it to.

If you can explain why your home setup is better for me than my home setup then please do. And remember, there are hundreds of millions of home Windows users just like me who simply don't understand what you mean when you talk about Windows malware. You see, we've never experienced it first hand.

So, please Dietrich, tell us why running (and maintaining) 2 OSs, one of them 10 years old, is better than running the one OS that does everything I need?

Thank YOU!
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
I had Windows 7 starter on my Acer Aspire when purchased OOTB
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate Updated - 28th Aug 2010
@NonZealot
But for me Windows 7 starter means 'featureless' watered-down.
So I formatted the drive and installed Ubuntu Netbook Edition which runs superbly and of course as I've maintained is more secure.

In our organization, we downgrade to Windows XP.
I personally don't have a need for Windows 7.

But, the point of my discussion wasn't about my Netbook setup; it was about the failed security design in Windows 7.

I won't digress into issues of preference, whether or not Linux has the App that you need, but, when it comes to security, unlike Windows 7, Linux *will* sandbox any App you run. That provides a maximum of security and peace of mind.

And you can run your Windows Apps from Ubuntu just fine if you really need them. Just don't go on the net with Windows unless you are behind a router NAT firewall; even then you are placing your Windows system at risk.

You can use whatever you want but I don't use Virtual Box for anything other than Windows XP to VPN to the office 75 miles away--saving a trip to the office when I am on call.

There is no inherent risk doing that behind a broadband router firewall.

Otherwise, any and all access to the net is facilitated with Ubuntu running AppArmor profiled Firefox.

There is no better solution than Linux with LSM for maximum security.

Does that help NZ?
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Put out a consistent message? Yes. Convince? No
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate Updated - 28th Aug 2010
@NonZealot
You can continue using your system. Be happy if that floats your boat.

My role is to put out a message that lets average to expert users know that there is an 'alternative' to Microsoft Windows. A safe superior technology alternative.

That alternative offers many benefits, not the least of which is you'll have no security issues if you switch to Ubuntu.

That is just one Distro, but the one I feel is safest of all Linux Distros.

So, rant, vent your spleen, or simply accept that what I wrote in the first thread is factually accurate.

Microsoft Windows security is defective. That needs to be repeated often and LOUD until everyone reads it and begins to fathom the extent to which a problem exists for which there is no solution provided by Microsoft.

There is no LSM equivalent and unfortunately users of Windows (less fortunate than the one you describe as not having experienced any security issues) are experiencing security issues or have and don't even know it nor does their operating system's A/V software detect the presence of a 64-bit root kit (Alureon).

So, I don't particularly care if you don't like my message.

It is important for others to know and understand the critical issues regarding MS Windows security.
  • Flagged
That alternative offers many benefits, not the least of which is you'll have no security issues if you switch to Ubuntu.

Anyone telling you that about any OS is a liar. And if they are lying about that it does make you wonder: what else are they lying about?

Dietrich is the equivalent of a used car salesman. You won't have any problems at all with this car, I inspected it myself. I stake my reputation on it!

Would you believe that statement? No. So why believe it from Dietrich?

There are no absolutes in life and if anyone, I mean anyone, tries to tell you otherwise, they are lying to you for personal profit. I stake my reputation on that.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
I know my opponent has no arguments when they make personal remarks
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate 28th Aug 2010
@NonZealot

You have no arguments regarding my original thread.
All of the information is factually correct.

Call me what you will but that means you lose.

BTW, I run Windows XP from VirtualBox in 'immutable' mode.

That means when the session is over, any session changes get dropped and the image is returned to its original startup 'immutable' state.

Makes running XP from a VM safe because any virus will get lost following shutdown.

Thanks for playing NZ. You lose.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
That's ok, You are shooting blanks.
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate Updated - 28th Aug 2010
@NonZealot

Take issue with my original thread, fine. But you are spinning/shifting bobbing/weaving shadow boxing yourself into a corner.

You've lost the argument when you get personal.
I stand by my original thread's points.

P.S. Since I am running XP from VirtualBox in immutable mode, there is no need to run A/V software, yes?

In your case, you had better run A/V scans often if not resident in memory all the time, but even that won't stop your Windows 7 from getting infected.

Your best option (since you don't see things my way) is to get a free copy of BitDefender System Rescue CD which you can use to boot up from and scan your PCs windows partitions off-line.

Be safe and You're welcome.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Time to join us in 2010 DTS.
ye 30th Aug 2010
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate: Just don't go on the net with Windows unless you are behind a router NAT firewall; even then you are placing your Windows system at risk.

You're referring to events from pre-2004. Six years ago. Windows has had a built in firewall since Windows XP was released back in October 2001. It was enabled by default in SP2 (which was released in 2004). Time to join us in the present and stop living in the past.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Personal Computer Security: Using Uncommon Sense
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate 30th Aug 2010
@ye

Another country heard from.
You are a couple of days late and a dollar short.

Get out of the Windows reality deflection field ye.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate: Thanks for playing NZ. You lose.
  • Flagged
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate P.S. Since I am running XP from VirtualBox in immutable mode, there is no need to run A/V software, yes?

Why do you run Windows at all? If it's THAT insecure, why would you preach so loudly against it, but still use it?

Isn't Linux the magical OS that cures all of my Windows woes? Apparently not.
0 Votes
+ -
@NonZealot Bingo..and reality hurts some people.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
How Can Users Know There is No Bot?
RandSec 30th Aug 2010
@NonZealot "remember that the number of people running Windows with no malware issues outnumbers the entire Linux desktop community by several orders of magnitude."

Really? No malware "issues?" You mean, if the malware never actually raises its hand and says "Here I am," there is no "issue?" But if malware is present, it is doing what the bot-handler wants, not what the computer owner wants, and that, by itself, is an "issue."

How can users know there is no bot? Even expert users can think they are clean when they are not. Malware bots are built to hide, and they do it very well. Where is the test which guarantees to find any hidden bot? Malware and antivirus scanners make no such claim. In fact, we know that zero-day malware installers generally will not be found, and their "encrypted" bot infections also generally will not be found.

Without a test that finds all malware, there is no way to know that malware is not present. Because we only know about what we can find, my guess is that successfully-hidden bot infection are much more common than we know.
0 Votes
+ -
Master Joe Says...They Try So Hard
MasterJoe 30th Aug 2010
@NonZealot The interesting thing here is I don't COMPLETELY disagree with the above post about using Linux. However, what every single Linux fan completely misses (out of ignorance or hard-headed stubbornness) is that not every PC user is on a level where they can use Linux in its current state. People claim that Linux is a better OS at the core, and that may or may not be true (I disagree, but that's just an opinion and everyone is entitled to theirs). But, the core doesn't define how i tlooks and acts and feels. The fact is, more than 90% of the computer user population wouldn't use Windows if it wasn't the preferred OS for them. What happened in the 90s is long gone, and that excuse was over a long time ago. I've used Ubuntu in both a VM and dual-boot environment, and just couldn't make the switch entirely. I rely on windows because the apps I need are Windows apps. And, this is not likely to change in the near future, since no one wants to spend their time developing for a platform that has a 3% market share vs. a 90%+ market share where the audience is much more broad.

On another note, those who claim that they are running Ubuntu Remix on their netbook, remember that Ubuntu created that distribution specifically for the purpose of running it on a netbook. It is stripped down or "watered down" just like Windows Starter is. The only difference is that Linux runs on lower-end hardware, even to that extent better because there is less to it. Good? Sort of. It means you can run Linux on your 10-year-old PC, whereas Windows 7 might not run so great. But, if you're like me, you have a desktop at home running an Intel Core i7 Extreme CPU with 12 GB RAM and a 600 GB WD VelociRaptor HD and don't much worry about resources or memory usage because your OS hardly puts a dent in them. But, my laptop, which I use strictly for grad school, is hardly on the same level, and it STILL runs Windows 7 64-bit with no problem (It's a Lenovo T500). In addition, a netbook could never replace an everyday use PC. Can you play games on a netbook? Not really. I'm not a PC gamer (I tend to play my PS3 now and again, when I'm not doing homework on the weekends), but many PC users do play online games (Halo, WoW, etc.). And, if you can't run those games on the hardware, they aren't interested. They key to PC is PERSONAL. It has to do what the user wants, or it doesn't matter. And, neither Linux nor the netbook offers this key feature.

Now, one last comment. There is an easy work-around in Windows to 99% of the issues tha timpact everyday windows users. Create a non-admin account and use that all the time. If you need administrative privilages, run the program as an admin (Windows 7 does a good job of not letting you run as full-blown admin anyway). Then, switch back to your regular user account. Difficult and a pain? Sometimes. As big a pain as dual-booting or running a VM which KILLS your hard drive and consumes a lot of your RAM? Not so much.

I've said it a hundred times before. If the Linux community were smart, they'd focus on overtaking Mac OS in the OS market. You can't focus on the competition in first place until you're in second, and Linux has a ways to go to even get there. One at a time boys.

--Master Joe
0 Votes
+ -
How to know if there is a bot
rick@... 30th Aug 2010
@RandSec: While this may be beyond that abilities of the average computer user, the truth is that it is not all that hard to use a program like LinkLogger, which works with your hardware router/firewall to keep a log of all the Internet activity which takes place on your network.

Let's face it: the purpose of a "bot" is to communicate with some "master control" system and engage in some kind of activity, such as sending spam, participating in DOS attacks, etc.

No matter how well hidden the "bot" may be, the fact is that there WILL be signs of the bot's activity showing up in your router's logs. You will see traffic going back and forth over your Internet connection. This will be activity that you KNOW you are not initiating on your own.

Of course, you could try to make the arguement that someone could be infected with some kind of malware that does not engage in any activity which results in traffic to your router/firewall. That is certainly possible. However, in reality, it seems kind of pointless for someone to create malware that doesn't do something.

Rick
0 Votes
+ -
No RDF here.
ye 30th Aug 2010
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate: Get out of the Windows reality deflection field ye.

Like many I've been using Windows malware free for years. I don't know why you have such a difficult time with it but there are many, many people who do not. Maybe you should listen to them instead of relying on your knowledge? Seems they know what they're talking about whereas you do not.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Everyone listen to me!! Listen to me!!!
NonZealot 29th Aug 2010
Did you know that the car you drive will not stop bullets? That's right!!! If someone were to shoot a bullet at your car with you in it, YOU COULD DIE!!!! Ford won't tell you that it's cars won't stop bullets. Neither will Toyota!

You see, Ford and Toyota cars have fundamental design flaws that PREVENT THEM FROM BEING ABLE TO STOP BULLETS!!! What you need is to stop using these fundamentally flawed cars and instead buy a Voltron 9000! Voltron 9000 comes with armor plating and Lexan glass which will protect you and your loved ones from BULLETS!!!!

If you truly demand a maximum of security and analyze Ford and Toyota security for what it is, you will reach the conclusion (an obvious one) that the general design of Ford and Toyota cars is lacking per the above armor plating and Lexan glass explanation and therefore is deficient.

Please make time to allow a full investigation of the alternatives and consider Voltron 9000 for its superior security.

May I recommend you please consider Nonzealot Voltron 9000 10.04 LTS, which includes armor plating and Lexan glass by default.

Voltron 9000: The safest car on the planet.
I stake my reputation in it.
0 Votes
+ -
Bazinga!
0 Votes
+ -
@NonZealot Wow, that was a pathetic comeback.

Dietrich wins.
0 Votes
+ -
Thinking About Automobile Recalls
RandSec 30th Aug 2010
@NonZealot

If a car, in its normal environment, suddenly became undetectably dangerous to operate, would we blame the driver, or would we blame the car and the manufacturer?
0 Votes
+ -
@NonZealot
The score: NonZealot - 1, Dietrich T. Schmitz - 0
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Sadly.......
Alan Smithie 30th Aug 2010
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate

x86 architecture is fundamentally insecure and until the OS is designed from the hardware up this is going to be the case with ANY OS running on x86.
@Alan Smithie: x86 architecture is fundamentally insecure and until the OS is designed from the hardware up this is going to be the case with ANY OS running on x86.
@Alan Smithie

That's a FAIL.
0 Votes
+ -
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate

Or, you can unplug your PC and be 100% as effective as Linux. Both make a great door stop.
0 Votes
+ -
RE:Be safe.
richdave 30th Aug 2010
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
0 Votes
+ -
Carpentry 101
use_what_works_4_U 30th Aug 2010
@richdave
I'm not a fan of Windows. I'm not a fan of Linux. I'm less of a fan of Macs than I used to be. What I am is a fan of the right tool for the right job.

You sir (if you'll pardon the pun) have hit the nail squarely on the head.

@NonZealot
You and I have sparred many times before. I often disagree with your opinions. Not this time, though.
Tell it like it is NonZealot! You are right on the money today!
0 Votes
+ -
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate : You're not an advocate; you're a zealot and fanatacist in my opinion and need to take a step back and look at reality. You've posted anything but an open-minded, logical approach to an important subject. Too bad you staked your reputation on that, honestly. Sorry, that's my opinion.
0 Votes
+ -
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate

I disagree with your premise. There are multiple types of vulnerabilities: those that are remotely exploitable due to a coding flaw in a service or application, those that are the result of social engineering such as email attachments (viruses, malware) or luring a user to a suspect site, and so on.

While Linux security shines in the social engineering/virus/malware area (for reasons that are too many to cover here), it is still vulnerable to remote exploit. Depending on your point of view, one could say that Linux is more vulnerable simply due to the raw number of 'patches' that are released (Linux > Windows). Whether you agree with this or not, your statement "That alternative offers many benefits, not the least of which is you'll have no security issues if you switch to Ubuntu." is a fallacy. Unless you can confirm that Ubuntu never has had, and never will have a reported vulnerability, security patch or update, then this statement cannnot be true. And we both know Ubuntu releases security patches regularly.

In my humble opinion, I believe that OpenBSD and NetBSD are the most secure 'desktop' operating systems out there. Regardless, I run Windows at home. Granted, I work in the IT field and have a security background which gives me an advantage over the average home user, however I have managed to secure my computer and educate the rest of my household such that we have not been compromised to date. It all depends on what you compare. Is Linux more secure? Maybe. But I can take a Windows system, put it behind a firewall, and follow normal hardening practices such as disabling unneseccary services and local user accounts, changing the default file system permissions, etc., and make it quite secure.
Passwords: Let's repeat that: DO NOT GIVE IT TO ANYONE. A real administrator does not need it to reset your account, change your quota, or verify your identity. The only person you need to give one to is a tech (whom you trust) you have asked to fix your PC. Not for hardware, just software. You don't need to go overboard with complexity - just avoid password=username and things like "12345", "qwerty". Write it down on a card in your wallet if you have to - if you lose your wallet, change the password. Try not to use the same one for absolutely everything: for websites that want you to register before you can comment, make up random ones and have your browser remember, don't use your email or banking password.
0 Votes
+ -
What you need to think about Scott, is why we're relying on common sense instead of the computer itself. There must be 1,001 ways a computer can be compromised just by visiting a Website, opening email, opening a file or installing an application or an add-on. Is it realistic to expect anyone to be able to protect themselves with "common sense" or is the just wishful thinking? We're allowing the computer industry to sell us insecure technology and it's high time we put a stop to all of this nonsense. All this "bolt-on" security we're using isn't making computing secure, it's just making computing more complicated. It's possible to make computers inherently secure, but it won't happen until we take a stand and make the computer security industry re-engineered all the hardware, operating systems and applications.
It's possible to make computers inherently secure, but it won't happen until we take a stand and make the computer security industry re-engineered all the hardware, operating systems and applications.

The iPhone is inherently secure or is actually quite close to it. Is it because it is technically superior to Android or Windows Mobile? Nope. It is because you, as the user of the phone, don't have the root / admin password and you don't get to decide what suite of applications you get to install on your phone. Apple decides. That comes with advantages (better security) and disadvantages (less freedom) but that is the only way of keeping a computer totally secure: turn it into an appliance.

Please note I'm not saying the iPhone is perfectly secure. It isn't. If it was, jailbreaking would be impossible. I'm talking about the model, not the implementation. The more secure model is to not give the user root / admin permissions on the computer and to heavily restrict what they can install on the computer. Apple's implementation is imperfect, as is Google's, as is Microsoft's, but the model is sound.
0 Votes
+ -
@NonZealot
The iPhone model is secure for Apple, not exactly secure for you. Apple has full access to your device and everything that you put into it and do with it (I'm not saying they're abusing this power; I'm just saying that there are no security measures to stop them from doing so). I prefer to be in control of my own device, and not simply trust Apple with all my security.

Of course, with a phone there is always a certain amount of access that your carrier will have, so phone security is never one hundred percent.
0 Votes
+ -
Even Apple has let some malware through their market
david.hunt@... Updated - 30th Aug 2010
@NonZealot

So the closed market approach is flawed by less than full code review. In fact, for a phone I'd prefer the Android model even though that is also imperfect.

Let's face it you cannot ignore security precautions on any platform. Nobody else is going to be the *archangel protector* that will eliminate the need to be personally vigilant.

BTW, I use both Windows and Linux concurrently, everyday... the right tool for the job at hand, and since Windows is running in a VM on Linux, I can even split some work into tasks that are performed across the two OSes using copy / paste and accessing the same filesystem.
0 Votes
+ -
"Adblock Plus for Firefox and Chrome. Please keep in mind, however, that many legitimate websites are paid for through the use of ad revenue?so as a courtesy to them, disable the ad blocking while visiting those sites."

Ahahahahahaha. Quit trying to cater to the crazies at Ars Technica. Leave your adblocker on ALL THE TIME people. ALL THE TIME.
@OS Reload
If Windows is so safe, then why did you highlight so many popular antivirus software? Yesh.
0 Votes
+ -
Popular AV products?
Wolfie2K3 30th Aug 2010
@Zc456
The stuff in bold in his post are ALL known to be crap laden scamware/malware. Popular would be Norton, McAfee, Panda, Avast!, AVG, etc...
0 Votes
+ -
Thanks for recommending Avira AntiVir Personal
Daniel Breslauer 30th Aug 2010
I'm a big fan of Avira AntiVir and use it on all my personal computers, and recommend it to others as well.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Personal Computer Security: Using Uncommon Sense
Badgered Updated - 30th Aug 2010
@OS Reload Linux is clearly lagging in this front


Seems to be missing alot of other useful software as well... Some ERP clients for one. But you go on...
@Badgered
You can do better than that, surely. You know as well as anyone here that this has nothing to do with whether Linux can run ERP software or not and everything to do with Windows being in the right place at the right time with the right idea to win the market well before most people knew of Linux. This cannot be held against Linux in a technical light.

Having said that, even as a Linux user myself I admit I get let down by outrageous claims of invincibility and superiority on behalf of its advocates. They're often just not true and just serve to devalue any sound arguments they may have presented earlier for running Linux. It's ironic the purveyors of such slate the legendary Loverock for his baseless anti-Linux drivel...

Ubuntu runs faster than Windows on the particular hardware I own for most tasks, has some fun desktop effects, plus plethora of useful free software etc, but I gladly switch to XP/Win7 + Office2007 for office work on the same gear because it serves my needs far better. This one thing alone doesn't necessarily make Linux comparatively worse or Windows better... rather it's about choosing the best tools for getting the job done for you personally while learning to keep your personal biases at the door when determining such. I think Android is great and have an HTC Desire to prove it - it's just that the iPhone4 is also an undeniably excellent piece of kit too.

Go with what you feel is best, but don't turn that same freedom into a license to flame others for their choices. You'll find when you present the virtues of your preferred system with that in mind, you may gain some real tech cred and may even change the odd mind or two, if that's what tickles your fancy... but hang on... this is zdnet and I could be dreaming!
A pretty decent article, Scott, with one exception. You wrote, "Please keep in mind, however, that many legitimate websites are paid for through the use of ad revenue?so as a courtesy to them, disable the ad blocking while visiting those sites." Ummm, no way! I cannot imagine anyone enabling/disabling ad blocking on a per-site basis. WAY too much trouble.
You wrote, "The parent company also theatens anyone that reviews them in a negative light, which is why I have not named them directly in this article." GROW A PAIR! You claim to have valuable information that you then refuse to share because you're afraid of the repercussions. You'd have been a lot better off just omitting the (non)information from the article.
0 Votes
+ -
Not enough help for the intended audience
DittoHeadStL 30th Aug 2010
This article was written by a very tech-savvy person and is easily consumed by other tech-savvy people. As such, you're pretty much preaching to the choir, the vast majority of whom have already done the recommended actions.

The intended audience is loaded with tech neophytes, most of whom would dismiss the recommendations as too much work. Why? They don't know what you're talking about. When most of them read "If you have a hardware firewall, use it," many have no idea that a router has a hardware firewall, how to use it, or in many cases even how to administer the router. Similarly, "Block any inbound ports that are not in use. Use network address translation (NAT) so that the network address of your computer is masked from the outside world." would evoke the following questions: "What's an inbound port? How do I know whether or not I user it? How do I use NAT? Do I need to know the network address of my compyter in order to mask it?" If the reader is at all diligent, he or she will start searching the web for answers to these questions. But wouldn't it be nice if the author of the article found some nice tutorials on every non-English term and included those as hyperlinks? Without them, this article would cause most neophytes to just give up.
0 Votes
+ -
Some Things Missed
RandSec 30th Aug 2010
"Let?s face it, with computers come risk. If you have information on them that others would find valuable, inevitably someone will try to take it from you."

Which implies that those without secrets or valuable information need not worry. But attackers generally have no idea who has what before the bot is installed; it is the bot that allows them to look around. Computers are infected independent of the information they contain.

Even worse, for many users the major risk involves bank accounts, which are obviously not present in their computer, but which can be *accessed* from their computer. When money is taken from an account the situation is a mess. Individuals eventually get their money back, but small businesses not so much. Accordingly, small businesses probably need to stop banking online, unless they learn and use a LiveCD to avoid infection. Generally, that means Linux.
0 Votes
+ -
I feel the best way to avoid your private information from being abconded from your computer is don't put it on there in the first place. I never bank online or transmit sensitive information online, email, IM and so on.

If a person has no choice then I suggest get a little netbook just for banking and such, and having a "hot rod" computer for your email, social networking, web surfing, and such. In other words "never keep all your eggs in one basket"!
Never mind security. What a profound disappointment the Windows 7 operating system is. Vista is much better. At least most of it has been fixed.
Well, here is my 2 cents as adjusted for inflation.

I use WinXP, Win7, CentOS, FreeBSD. Think of OSes as tools. What is the tool to use for the job. I still use Windows because the company I work for insist on it. All of the apps are in Windows. The support people know nothing except Windows. I run Windows on my Mac using Parallels. I have another machine with CentOS with Windows running under VMware. I have a third machine running FreeBSD.

The right tool for the right job.

If it is security you want than any flavor of BSD is the ticket.

BTW, a good Firewall like IPTables monitors both incoming and outgoing traffic. The Windows Firewall just filters incoming.

Flame suit on and ready for incoming wink

Lawk
0 Votes
+ -
The Keys for the Firewall...
david.hunt@... 30th Aug 2010
@hcpf

The other issue with the Windoze Firewall is that it allows applications to register exceptions.

Even typical broadband consumer routers that contain a Firewall allow "PlugnPray", which means that the malware just has to land on your conputer and then tell the Firewall to open up inbound port redirection.

Oh bugger. Nobody has mentioned this yet!
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

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