Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Windows Attacks on the Rise

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 14:06:29 +0100, Richard Rasker wrote
(in article <pan.2006.09.01.13.06.28.237134@xxxxxxxxxx>):

> Op Fri, 01 Sep 2006 11:49:33 +0100, schreef Peter Hayes:
> 
>> On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 08:54:21 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote
>> (in article <1468488.qjgW78f8Md@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):
>> 
>>> Uptick in Windows attacks reported
>>> 
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>> Several security experts are warning of increased cyberattacks targeting 
>>>> Windows PCs, but Microsoft says all is calm on the attack front.
>>> `----
>>> 
>>> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6111583.html
>> 
>> "If a PC is hijacked, SANS Internet Storm Center recommends completely 
>> erasing the hard drive and reinstalling the computer's operating system. 
>> "That sounds drastic...but it gets rid of the worm, gets rid of the botnet, 
>> and plus you have a brand new box," according to the ISC."
> 
> Well, actually it's the recommended course of action for a cracked Linux
> box too.
> 
>> The amount of work involved would be immense. Install XP SP2, then hours 
>> spent installing all the subsequent updates. Plus all the reboots. And all 
>> just to remove one worm. Sheesh...
> 
> Lemme see ... modern Linux box, distro on DVD ... Personal record
> installing Mandriva 2006 on an AMD64, 2GB RAM, fast HD's: 12 minutes from
> power-up to a fully functional system. Subsequent installation of updates
> and extra packages: perhaps an hour. Let's err on the generous side, and
> say that a full Linux reinstall will on average take two hours.
> 
> With Windows, this is more like two days, at least. Now let's calculate
> what it'd cost to rid the world of malware:
> - Total number of Windows computers: 300 million
> - Infected with unwanted software: 50% (let's be generous once again)
>   => total number of Windows reinstalls: 150 million
>   => at 20 hours per reinstall = 3 billion man-hours
>   => at $10 per hour (my generosity knows no limits):
> 
> Grand total: it'll cost 30 billion dollars *at least* (and probably double
> or triple this amount), just to fumigate the whole of the Windows fleet.
> Then, to maintain this situation, people will spend on average $20 per
> machine on anti-virus, anti-malware etcetera, so throw in another $6bn.
> But that's peanuts in comparison to the cleanup cost.

Microsoft is like nuclear energy. It's cheap, but leaves behind a legacy of 
waste products that cost billions to dispose of.

> IMHO, Microsoft should be forced to pay back this $30bn to humanity.
> After all, they got this kind of money peddling their crapware in the
> first place, getting the world stuck with a malware and spam scourge of
> biblical proportions. AND making even more money off it, selling their
> Wanker "solutions".

The US DoJ should make it clear to Microsoft they'll be fined $1m for every 
Vista security exploit. They won't of course, but maybe if they did Microsoft 
would stop and think.

It's actually in the US's best interests to insist on a secure Vista, because 
one day some malcontent, terrorist, whatever, will create the ultimate worm 
that destroys much of the business community's ability to operate.

Or alternatively, mandate Linux or OS X for all business use say by 2010. 

>>> There is _a lot_ of disinformation going on.
> 
> Microsoft's PR and marketing is disinformation perfected into a art form.
> To hear Ballmer and cronies speak is to hear lies.

It's a great pity we can't go back in time and persuade Gary Kildall not to 
go flying...

-- 

Peter


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index