McAfee dumps signatures and proclaims an (almost) end to botnets Signature-based malware identification has been around since the dawn of the computer security industry, but McAfee has said it's dumping the system – or rather, adapting it – in an upgraded security suite which will (it claims) virtually eliminate susceptibility to botnets. McAfee's malware signature database has grown to …
I do wish the moderators here would stop all this personalised bashing of individual posters that is being targetted against specific individuals who post here.
Seriously. If you don't like what he says, the prove him wrong. If you can't do that, then don't bother commenting, about what he says. Your personal thoughts about him are irrelevant. All this ridiculous name calling just makes you all look like children.
"I do wish the moderators here would stop all this personalised bashing of individual posters"
The trouble with deleting comments that bash individuals is that it spirals into a "he started it!" nightmare. The general rule I like to see people follow is "play the ball, not the man". So if people stick to that then things work out.
C.
You can try, but people who reject all evidence or utilize irrelevant technicalities to make themselves fell right will never change their mind. When you combine that with a strong desire to evangelize everywhere people will naturally get tired of constantly bring forth the same evidence proving them wrong over and over again. Ignoring them doesn't really work because then they could possibly convince someone new that they are correct. Over time the will eventually piss someone off enough to respond to them with an attack of some kind and with the number of readers hear there will always be someone new being pushed over the edge.
@Dave Dowell - imagine, if you will, a fly buzzing round your head. You try to shoo it away, but it keeps coming back. You can either keep trying to just brush it aside, or become increasingly more annoyed trying to swat it.
This is what has happened here.
You're absolutely right about trying to counter-argue posts you don't agree with - however, I can understand some posters getting frustrated when faced with a continual barrage of provocative posts that usually lack any form of evidence or back-up, especially when the poster in question (I think we all know who we mean here) refuses to acknowledge any counter-argument that does not fit in with his own philosophy and just continues to "buzz around our heads" - to use the earlier analogy.
It's why I think a "report complaint" facility - similar to "report abuse", but for more general use - would be a good idea.
a few rules to avoid the malware would be better than AV software that bungs up your system/network/entire internet
1. Phone chargers for all staff : stops them plugging their phones into those handy usb ports on the front of the PC
2. remove Java and flash from the browsers
3. Anyone caught with a USB stick is fired.
4. Anyone opening an e.mail attatchment is set on fire.
And lastly for those really serious about stopping malware from seizing vital data
Install Linux
I've visited companies where to enter the campus, everyone sends their belongings through a metal detector, phones are checked to make sure cameras are taped over, sd cards or flash drives are banned, etc. etc. In the government sector too, there are some pretty extreme measures taken for security (e.g. supercomputers that are physically partitioned so that confidential simulations can't possibly be spied on by other code).
Generally though, I assume the powers that be look at the relative cost of preventing malware via draconian measures (quality of employee, worker happiness, inefficiency in working with clients who want to use e-mail attachments) and decide that it's much better to employ a handful of smart people to setup firewalls, IDSes, monitor developments in the security field, etc. and basically hope that the risk is reduced sufficiently.
Similar considerations apply to safety from muggers-- if you wanted to make sure you'd never get mugged, you could hole up in an underground bunker with 80 years worth of non-perishable food, cases of ammunition and high powered weapons, hopped up on methamphetamines monitoring your CCTV, and you'd have a pretty high confidence in your personal safety. On the other hand, it might not be a very happy existence.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
