IT Employment

Ask something
Discussion Locked

only 13 Million (?)

0 helpful
15 replies

by dawgit

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.
Maybe that is the good news, only 13 Million. David Dagon, a Ph.D. student at Georgia Tech who has spent several years charting the global spread of botnets, estimates that in the 13-month period ending in January, more than 13 million PCs around the world were infected with malicious code that turned them into bots. And that's not good news for us trying to keep things straight. Are we all fighting a loosing battle? What is the sense if all the bubbas with a computer in this world don't keep their computers clean and safe? Do we need to have a system in place like a licence to use the internet? (check out the Europian computer drivers license program) After all, you don't get to take a car on the road unless you meet minimum standards, and have a licence to proove it. If you don't meet or agree to the standards, you can't bring your computer on the internet. Simple, no?

15 replies

by bfilmfan

Since we don't require a license to use a telephone, it will be hard to require a license to use the Inernet.

by dr dij

when I clicked on this, I thought it would be about the 11 million illegal aliens in the US. (Darn, where are those men-in-black when we need them, this isn't an intergalactic kegger!?)

then half hour later another senator said there were 12 million. So population grew by 1 million in half an hour! Today it's 13 million? woops it's just pesky steal-your-date bots..

I think we need to block their access to the net. Kind of a shared thing like siteadvisor's list of spyware websites to block. Something like those could expand and be extended to routers and ISPs. They would block access to domains / IP addresses at their connection point, and periodically past that. This way, if a lawless domain wanted to operate and not use the list, it would be walled off from the rest of the internet. ISPs that didn't agree to use the list could be kept out of all or certain segments of the net.

In esseence, we'd build a wall too high for the bad guys to jump over, clear from texas to.. (wait, wrong discussion :)

by tantor

Small thinking surrounds it.

I am always amazed at the number of Americans who want to legislate, license and profit the very life out of the Internet instead of seeing it for what it really is. A global entity that truly borderless. It's even more astonishing that Europe, an entity that is actively removing borders would support such a stupid idea.See how quickly they change their tune when the licenses become tracking devices or get comprimised. Talk about a haven for ID theft...

But until simple minded chimps stop trying to chunk it up into "my sections" and "their sections" and stop trying to profit from every nook and cranny, it will just be an unrealized opportunity. Not untilized fully, because some idiot somewhere thinks he's the righteous one and everyone else should have to pay to use what he thinks only he understands. You can't put walls in copper wire.

Why don't you try to sell the idea of requiring a license to go to the mall? Or the park. Try to require a license to run or walk.

Quit trying to mess with the Internet. It's not YOURS. It's ours. Even all those people you don't like. Get used to it. Think globally for once. Open your eyes and see what's possible instead of whining about how other people use it.

Besides, when was the last time a "Driver's license" stopped some "Bubba" from driving some POS truck with a bumber bungie-corded on? Just because they are licensed to drive doesn't mean they are licensed to maintain safe equipment.

by dr dij

I wasn't suggesting we block users in other countries. I was suggesting we block WEBSITES and servers that spew spyware. And this wouldn't be done by ME but by ISPs, and telecom carriers that wanted to save money by reducing the effects of zombie PCs, phishing, spam. And for those people, that part of the internet IS theirs.

They own it and it is used as bridge to other parts. They haven't made any promise to carry the 70% spam, which effectively requires triple the bandwidth. THey just don't have effective way of eliminating it now.

by renaissancehaas

I have started using a program called Pearl software. You can use it to monitor where your employees go, block where they can't go, or limit them to where it can go. It is user specific, not computer. There is a licensing fee, but it is mild in comparison to all of the pains I have to go through fixing problems. We don't sit here and spy on them, but it is the initial ammo to use if they do get something because I have found porn on several of the computers I've had to work on. They can't even tell it's on the system, unless they are tech savvy. Even if they try to uninstall it, Pearl will alert you to the attempt. As stated, currently we don't use it to monitor, but as protection, after they break a rule, then we bring the hammer down with its other features.

by dr dij

is a plugin that has green checkboxes if site DOESN"T have spam or spyware downloads.
? if unknown, and red x if site is known for such.
Just bought by Norton.

THeir servers browse the web and determine if sites have spyware. Sites the servers check for spyware is based on (optional) reporting by end users of sites they visit.

THey don't now but probably will have a corporate version that also blocks the sites rather than just warning you about it.

You can download this for free at download.com

This is actually the start of having block lists like I suggested. Essentially to keep you out of bad neighborhoods on the net.

by mwatch

Yeah we could require a cert for every user id on every computer before someone would be able to access the internet. Kinda like MS and thier license validation process. GREAT IDEA should work great!!! It would solve the problem, no one using the internet NO PROBLEMS.

PS - 5 days later i heard a senator quoting between 11 and 30 million. Give them a couple of days and they will drop the 11.

The similarity is pretty close. Gov can't enforce immigration law so $penalize$ employers. After all it's tough to collect fines from someone making $5.00/hr.

by senju

I think your idea has some merit but you are solving in the wrong manner. First of all, the internet is a global free area that has no bounds. Putting a license for the internet is like trying to control the universe. It will never happen. Anyway, some countries like China are trying to do what you are doing for their country and putting limitations with ISPs. You may want to watch out that pans out.

Anyway, for Corporate companies, you can place policies with AD. For Example, you can place a time limitation to access the internet (no Internet access after 11:00). There is also things like Frontbridge from Sprint where is creates a list of places users cannot roam based on certain words and address (sex, games,etc.)

As for protection of bots, virus, etc. for the private user, it is really just up to to the user to protect themselves. However, going through via google, AOL, MS weblive will be a growing trend.

Can you see now where the trend and concept of the Internet is going? If you go through a protected service, you will more or less be OK. If you roam the internet directly and freely, you will be in danger (if you don't have all the update protected software on your PC). It is now education. Go into fire unprotected or select your protected gear.

Anyway, License is not the solution!

by nighthawk808

I think there are over 300 million computers running Windows, which is nothing more than commercial "malicious code that turn[s] them into bots."

Disclaimer for the humor-impaired Windows crowd: This is a joke. I'll type it slowly for you: j...o...k...e. You know, one of those things that you go "Ha ha!" after.

But this isn't: the solution isn't to test the users for competence, it's to test M$ for competence. People just want their computers to run without constant care, feeding, deworming, and defragging. People don't want to have to take more care of their computer than they do their eight-year-old. The solution isn't smarter users, it's smarter OSes.

by mjwx

Nothing is idiot proof, not even linux. Take the humble spoon, now give the humble spoon to an idiot and you can bet your arse they will do something stupid with it (this is an argument for idiot control not spoon control). We need both smarter users and better OS's.

and one more thing:

Humor
This program has stopped or is not responding.

by senju

We can poor water over the fire and HOPE that it dies. But what if there is a spark and it ignites the curtain next to you and you die?
My point is we can ask MS to solve the problem (which I think they are trying to do with Vista and WebLive) but there will *ALWAYS* be sparks that ignite around you from time to time. We also need to educate all users that logon to the internet, the dangers and how to protect themselves. That can be said about anything in life and Internet is no different.

by Former member

You were hired to work at your job! If you can't do this your costing the company money and you need to leave your job. Playing on the Internet is like bringing a toy or book to work, you can use those things at home, not on company time. You can be replaced!

by bond_e

I don't think you or I, need a license to surf or otherwise utilize and enjoy the internet.

by jwareham

I agree. Being a Network Admin, myself, I have more than once stated users need a "license to drive"! It really comes down to a core responsibility to know how to use a tool properly.

by oneamazingwriter

and it's so simple, it probably won't happen. (Cynic)
I took driver's education before I got my driver's license. Public libraries have free courses or courses that charge a token price to insure that people attend as scheduled. Coleges with computer labs could offer courses and testing. High schools could have Internet Driver's Ed programs with tests and licenses issued.

That won't insure that every operator is licensed, since the computer can't tell who is operating it, but it will insure that there is a licensed operator in any home that has a computer.

Just because I have the price of a car doesn't mean that I will be a responsible driver, but registering, insuring and having a license for that car helps. People tend to have more respect for things that they have to pay for.

Operating systems will be vulnerable for as long as there are intelligent hackers who choose to destroy rather than create. Educating operators would help.

This discussion is closed to new replies.