boards.ie - rated "Red" by McAfee Site Advisor

cast_iron

Well, actually, it's a program that alot of people have any problem using because not everyone is an expert in using computers. Not everyone lives half their lives on-line, so anti-virus and firewalls are not really that big a deal for most people.
For the vast majority of people, anti-viruses make very little difference ie. unless you are running a serious amount of apps, which anti-virus one uses is going to be largely irrelevant.

Personally, I would use neither Norton or McAffee (I un-installed the bundled Norton), but I don't deride those who don't necessarily know the difference, especially when most of them don't give a damn - considering most people don't live on boards!

Sparky

Norton is worse tbh.

Vexorg

cast_iron wrote:

but I don't deride those who don't necessarily know the difference, especially when most of them don't give a damn - considering most people don't live on boards!

I think the derision is of the software and not those using the software. Using Mcafee and Norton is clearly better than using no protection. Its a like a Linux/Mac/Windows "my os is better than your os debate"

V.

Shiminay

cast_iron wrote:

Well, actually, it's a program that alot of people have any problem using because not everyone is an expert in using computers. Not everyone lives half their lives on-line, so anti-virus and firewalls are not really that big a deal for most people.
For the vast majority of people, anti-viruses make very little difference ie. unless you are running a serious amount of apps, which anti-virus one uses is going to be largely irrelevant

***WARNING***
Slightly off-topic rant approaching
It needs to be a big deal for everyone, we cannot afford the luxury of not knowing anymore when computers and the internet are such a fundamental part of people's personal and business lives. There is no excuse for not knowing what a virus scanner is and how it works. There is also no excuse for not spending a half hour learning about which one is best and so on. Do you just go and buy a car cause you like red cars? No, you'll test drive, maybe read a motoring mag or read some reviews on the web. The same sort of attention to detail needs to be enforced for the internet and anyone who doesn't think this should be whipped with their mouse!

My housemate came home laughing about how someone in their section of their office brought their whole network down with a virus they brought in on a USB pen. That sort of thing should never bloody happen (and why the IT people had allowed external drives is a mystery)! I was horrified that she was laughing and asked her if she had any idea what had actually happened and was the person responsible going to be sacked. She didn't seem to think that bringing a network of that size (National College of Ireland) down was grounds for dismissal. I told her that if she introduced a virus to our home network I'd most likely break bones.

"I didn't know that if I stabbed this person in the heart they'd die!" doesn't work as a defence and neither should a lack of basic technical working knowledge of an everyday tool like a computer. It's not as if it's a difficult thing to do and it's not as if there aren't lots of tutorials available for all to see.

*** end of rant ***

Sorry, I really had to get that off my chest.

rogue-entity

DeVore wrote:

Exactly my thoughts.... I've been online since 1988 and the worst, most persistent, invasive and frustrating "virus" I've ever mistakenly installed was McAfee. Its like the clap.

DeV.

There was an internet in Ireland in 88 O_o

Agreed on the McAfee front, Norton is pretty invasive as well ¬_¬

cast_iron

Vexorg wrote:

I think the derision is of the software and not those using the software.

Perhaps I should have have quoted Talliesin in my reply, but by and large, you are probably correct.

Kharn wrote:

It needs to be a big deal for everyone, we cannot afford the luxury of not knowing anymore when computers and the internet are such a fundamental part of people's personal and business lives. There is no excuse for not knowing what a virus scanner is and how it works.

I'm not going to debate it with you, but I fundamentally disagree.
I spend alot of time online, so I realise the significance.

But I think you are deluded in thinking that everyone is in the same boat. Whilst it may well be a "fundamental part of people's personal and business lives" (mine included), don't tar everyone with the same brush. The vast majority of people don't spend hours and hours online like alot of the boards regulars, so protection isn't quite the issue for everyone.

I'm just trying to add a little perspective on the issue. That's all.

Shiminay

I'm not trying to take a swipe or get the last word in (despite not wanting to debate, I hope you reply to this), but if you drive a car, you must pass a test and posess a licence as a car is a potentially deadly weapon.

In the wrong hands, a computer is a deadly weapon too. Not knowing how to use it is irresponsible. I'm not suggesting we licence computer use or anything like that, but the need for some sort of skillz needs to be impressed upon people - computers aren't going anywhere It doesn't matter if you're online for 10 minutes or 10 hours, you're still at risk. It doesn't matter what brand of AV protection you have if you don't know how to use it and that's what I was getting at. Unless you will never, ever connect to the internet or put a disk (be it floppy, DVD or USB) in a drive you need to have a virus scanner and it needs to be kept up-to-date. Anything else is irresponsible.

pokypoky

but could someone clear up exactly why its rated red? I don't like the sound of star-adserver, I think boards is great so I'd hate for my experience of it to be tainted by harmful spyware or the like.

Some reassurance is needed for people like me I think.

DeVore

rogue-entity wrote:

There was an internet in Ireland in 88 O_o

Agreed on the McAfee front, Norton is pretty invasive as well ¬_¬

The "DeVore" account came into being on the Maths PDP-8 BSD system when I first went to college. The internet has been around for a long long time you know
Ireland was an early adopter with HEANet (might have been called something else then).

Usenet was the Boards.ie of its day (still quite popular but largely spammed out of it now )

The web arrived around 92-94 depending on where you were sitting. If it was Cern or UCC then about 92 as memory serves but HTTP is only a protocol that runs over TCP/IP, the network protocol has existed from the 60's.

I give a good talk about the history of the internet .
Have given it in DCU a few times and other places. Its disturbing how many CS students think it started with Netscape.

DeV.

r3nu4l

DeVore wrote:

Its disturbing how many CS students think it started with Netscape.

DeV.

It's also disturbing to think that there are probably a good few people reading your post saying 'What's Netscape?'

Personally, I don't deride anybody for using McAfee or Norton but I do think people should be aware that the equivalent (and hassle-free) software is available for free on the net.

Also, I do think that people who don't have anti-virus or firewalls installed are selfish as they are allowing (albeit mostly unknowingly) their machines to be hijacked and used as drones in DDOS attacks and as email spam machines Perhaps if they realised what they were doing they would be more careful.

Talliesin

cast_iron wrote:

For the vast majority of people, anti-viruses make very little difference ie. unless you are running a serious amount of apps, which anti-virus one uses is going to be largely irrelevant.

I've found quite a few less-experienced computer users using Norton or McAffee and lacking the skills to fix their machines afterwards, coming to the conclusion that anti-virus and similar software is more trouble than its worth and going on to insist upon there being on AV on their machine.

Hence which AV they use can be particularly important, if some choices can lead them to the conclusion that they're better off without.

cast_iron wrote:

Personally, I would use neither Norton or McAffee (I un-installed the bundled Norton), but I don't deride those who don't necessarily know the difference

Nor do I. I do deride those products though.

The_Minister

I have to say, on our home computer we use McAfee, and the virus-scan on my laptop is two months out of date.
We use McAfee, and so do many people, because we didn't know any better. It is a certified company, with a good reputation (IRL), and as far as we knew, it was the best. It wasn't that we were lazy, but we had no clue where to get unbiased, safe information. I would never download free anti-virus software from the internet, in case it was a trick, and the big companies put out information basically saying that its not safe.
Sometimes, obtaining the information nessacery is not easy.

r3nu4l

^Well said The_Minister
I'm always amazed that people don't know these things but then again, I spend a lot of time searching for things on the internet so I've picked up a good bit of information on the way. Not eveyone is like me, I've heard that some people actually have lives

Talliesin

The_Minister wrote:

We use McAfee, and so do many people, because we didn't know any better. It is a certified company, with a good reputation (IRL), and as far as we knew, it was the best.

Yep. No reason why you should have known better.

Comically suggesting its purpose was to mess up machines was not intended to imply that people actually installed it for that purpose (though no doubt some people have, as a prank or something, but that's a whole other thing).

The_Minister wrote:

I would never download free anti-virus software from the internet, in case it was a trick, and the big companies put out information basically saying that its not safe.

That is true if you download free copies of AV that aren't meant to be free (that is to say, warez).

oscarBravo

DeVore wrote:

If it was Cern or UCC then about 92 as memory serves...

If my memory serves, the UCC website was the sixth website to exist in the whole wide world. Go Cork!

On the subject of Norton/McAfee: as someone who runs an ISP, those packages are the bane of my bloody life. It's such a drain on resources having to handle "my broadband is down" support calls from customers whose computers have been hijacked by software that's ostensibly there to protect them. If I had my druthers, I'd give everyone a basic Ubuntu install and no root access - that'd cut down my support workload by an order of magnitude or so.

gandalf

Nice to see my sales are getting you to do a decent days work oscar

oscarBravo

You should be ashamed of yourself... can't you get a real job?

watty

Oh.. I turned down servicing a PDP8 in 1981 as I felt it was too old!

I don't use an AV on any computers at home. If a doubt arises we run www.silentrunners.org to check.

We have had computers since 1979 and online email since 1985 and WWW since 1994 or so. Never ever any worm/virus/trojan investation.

It down to a few simple rules taught to the kids also since they had their own PCs.

AV programs give a false sense of security. Far more PCs that I have manually cleaned up stuff off had AV SW than not, and AV software often seems to crash other programs.

I have used 300 baud modem to dial a Belfast X.25 PAD from Co. Clare, log on to a Server in London and send email via gateway to bitnet or even send a telex to book a hotel (They thought it "official" by Telex, someone at home can't send telex?) 1986. Running CP/80 on a PCW8256.

Usenet actually works not to badly at 300 baud. I tested HTTP, POP, SMTP, NTTP and FTP in 2005 over 300bps packet radio... Web pages with pictures REALLY SLOW... 2 hrs for a typical page. But my faked sample Newsgroups (USENET) was fine.

I have an early mozilla floppy

I still have 3", 5.25" (two kinds) and 8" drives in attic just in case I need them for something.

Why do people:
* Not realise unsolicted attachments are suspicious EVEN from someone they know?
* Not turn on file endings and learn (or a have a list of dangerous kinds? or short list of safe kinds)
* realise that ... in a file name is a VERY bad sign
* Click on "OK" on popup dialogs without reading them
* Install toolbars, cleaners, clocks, calendars etc from adverts? Most are malware and the ones that arn't (e.g. Google) can expose your PC to fresh exploits.
* Click on links in email with out looking at status bar or thinking twice?

I used to give a training course in Secure PC use to the staff before we let them use the shiny new IT system we installed for them.

-- And always installed locked down proxy based firewalls with all the web mail sites blocked and all mail via MDaemon set to "eat" all emails with excutable files...

copacetic

watty wrote:

Oh.. I turned down servicing a PDP8 in 1981 as I felt it was too old!

I don't use an AV on any computers at home. If a doubt arises we run www.silentrunners.org to check.

We have had computers since 1979 and online email since 1985 and WWW since 1994 or so. Never ever any worm/virus/trojan investation.

It down to a few simple rules taught to the kids also since they had their own PCs.

AV programs give a false sense of security. Far more PCs that I have manually cleaned up stuff off had AV SW than not, and AV software often seems to crash other programs.

I have used 300 baud modem to dial a Belfast X.25 PAD from Co. Clare, log on to a Server in London and send email via gateway to bitnet or even send a telex to book a hotel (They thought it "official" by Telex, someone at home can't send telex?) 1986. Running CP/80 on a PCW8256.

Usenet actually works not to badly at 300 baud. I tested HTTP, POP, SMTP, NTTP and FTP in 2005 over 300bps packet radio... Web pages with pictures REALLY SLOW... 2 hrs for a typical page. But my faked sample Newsgroups (USENET) was fine.

I have an early mozilla floppy

I still have 3", 5.25" (two kinds) and 8" drives in attic just in case I need them for something.

Why do people:
* Not realise unsolicted attachments are suspicious EVEN from someone they know?
* Not turn on file endings and learn (or a have a list of dangerous kinds? or short list of safe kinds)
* realise that ... in a file name is a VERY bad sign
* Click on "OK" on popup dialogs without reading them
* Install toolbars, cleaners, clocks, calendars etc from adverts? Most are malware and the ones that arn't (e.g. Google) can expose your PC to fresh exploits.
* Click on links in email with out looking at status bar or thinking twice?

I used to give a training course in Secure PC use to the staff before we let them use the shiny new IT system we installed for them.

-- And always installed locked down proxy based firewalls with all the web mail sites blocked and all mail via MDaemon set to "eat" all emails with excutable files...

like he said, have never used AV on my home PC and never had an issue.

I am worried though as apparently:

In the wrong hands, a computer is a deadly weapon too.

:eek:

Asok

daveym wrote:

like he said, have never used AV on my home PC and never had an issue.

I am worried though as apparently:

:eek:

Ya ever get hit over the head with a hard drive.....

copacetic

Asok wrote:

Ya ever get hit over the head with a hard drive.....

Well of course I have my home PC wrapped in bubble wrap just in case, but no AV!

gandalf

daveym wrote:

Well of course I have my home PC wrapped in bubble wrap just in case, but no AV!

Wanna buy some AV, speeeeeciaaal price for you sir

Faith

watty wrote:

* Install toolbars, cleaners, clocks, calendars etc from adverts? Most are malware and the ones that arn't (e.g. Google) can expose your PC to fresh exploits.

:eek:

I love my Google toolbar!

watty

type this into Google Search

"Google toolbar" exploits

And weep...

Nevyn

Could be worse Watty I once got asked to look at a pc which was scragged.
Someone had turned on the file extesions and saw a bunch of files they never 'used' and to free up space seclected all the .dll files and deleted them..........

Talliesin

watty wrote:

AV programs give a false sense of security.

I agree with this. However that's an educational matter about AV. I like to compare them to life-jackets, safety-nets or kevlar vests. All of which can save your life, but none of which will protect you from exposure, falling wrong, or a head-shot respectively.

Never had my AV pick up anything (unless it was there before I got the machine) because I follow the same safety rules. But if I mess up, it might well catch my mistake.

watty wrote:

Why do people:
[snip]
* Not turn on file endings and learn (or a have a list of dangerous kinds? or short list of safe kinds)

File types are more a matter of safer than safe. .rtf is strictly safe, but if you've it bound to Microsoft Word (as many do) and a malware-containing Word Document is renamed something.rtf then the system will think "RTF files are opened by Word" pass it to Word which then thinks "Hmm, this RTF file is actually a Word Document file, I'd better fix that mistake and open it as a Word Document" and then the malware gets executed.

.jpeg/.jpg files are safe too, unless an un-patched GDI+ library is used in the application that reads them, and the image is set to exploit the known buffer-overflow in it.

There's just two cases where someone following reasonable precautions (and it's not easy for everyone to learn what an RTF file looks like if you open it straight into a text-editor) could find themselves depending on their AV.

Victor

So lets stick with txt files under 1kb.

Victor

So lets stick with txt files under 1kb, sent by fax.

RuggieBear

had to uninstall that bloatware McAfee, from a mate's computer last weekend. My god does it slow things down.

DeVore

I use AVG, have done for years, dunno if it does anything, its never found a virus but then I dont run exe's from unknown sources and generally watch what I do online...

UCC was the 9th website in the world ever. I have a picture of it on my laptop, sent by the original webmaster Peter Flynn. I'll upload it when I get home from my trip. Actually, heres a link: http://imbolc.ucc.ie/oldmenu.html

DeV.