Microsoft To Get Malware Bailout In Germany 226
hweimer writes "The German government plans on paying to set up a call center to help Windows users with malware infections. I think this has the effect of being a malware bailout for Microsoft, discouraging them and other software companies from writing better code and giving users little incentive to switch to more secure alternatives. How much government money is needed to run the call center is also not revealed." The call center, running in cooperation with ISPs (but not manufacturers), is envisioned to have a staff of about 40.
Not really (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this has the effect of being a malware bailout for Microsoft, discouraging them and other software companies from writing better code and giving users little incentives to switch to more secure alternatives.
I have to disagree with that. Malware problem is usually because of user stupidity. Like any other OS, you can run Windows securely if you don't do stupid things.
The thing is, as we don't care so much about how to properly feed, exercise and clean ponies, normal people don't care so much about computer security. They just want to do their thing. But now they would have a place they know they can seek help from, and who are giving helpful instructions how to not get infected anymore and how to solve their problem. Maybe those hints stick, maybe not, but at least they can get help with the problem (without calling over our fellow slashdotters all the time!)
But what is an interesting piece in the article (and somewhat worry-some)
Before the plans are implemented, however, a decision needs to be made on what sanctions customers who decline to cooperate with their ISP can be subjected to. According to an eco project manager, quoted by the dpa, "Anyone surfing without proper anti-virus software is endangering other web users, in the same way that a car driver driving with faulty brakes is endangering other road users."
I'm sure Symantec will hurray for that, but I don't want someone push an av software down my throat that I don't even need. Even less on my linux server. I really hope it only means those users who have been identified by the ISP to be sending spam out.
But the bottom line is, it's not a "bailout" for Microsoft. Malware goes where the users and money are and any kind of better code or secure alternatives cannot go around user stupidity. Linux is mostly secure from malware because the users generally are more geeky than the casual users on Windows and don't just random stuff from the internet. Repositories also help with this, but if Linux ever gained any actual desktop marketshare and casual users, the 3rd party applications/games/whatever that people want would be downloaded from the internet just the same way as on Windows. But any (good) Linux sysadmin knows there been worms in Linux too and remote hacks are commonplace if the system isn't properly secured (and casual users just wont do that).
Re:Not really (Score:5, Funny)
as we don't care so much about how to properly feed, exercise and clean ponies
On the contrary, I've had an inexplicable interest, some might even say obsession, with ponies since April 1, 2006.
Re:Not really (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Quite the contrary, you're too damn young if 3 years seems like a long time.
Re: (Score:2)
Best. April Fools Page. Ever.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
1. This isn't the role of government.
2. No matter how much the apologists bray, the fact is that Windows has the most infections. The proof is in the pudding! Yes, user stupidity contributes to that... but it ignores deep design flaws in Windows itself! Will the infections ever go toward zero even with the best designs but dumbest users? No. But it sure doesn't excuse it being in the other extreme for Windows.
Re:Not really (Score:5, Insightful)
1. This isn't the role of government.
I'd normally be the first to agree, but isn't a large portion of malware used for criminal activity? Identity theft, botnets that engage in DDoS extortion attempts, spam relays, phishing, etc, etc. It seems to me that law enforcement (i.e: government) has a legitimate interest in reducing the number of malware infections that are out there.
Of course, a call center filled with follow the script support drones probably isn't the best way to go about doing that.......
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not really, governmental organizations are not so much interested in helping you clean up your malware-PC, but in funding the internet cops to trace and bring the perpetrators to justice.
The callcentre script drones will probably be fine - they'll tell everyone to run spybot, install an AV system, run windows updates and then take it to a repair centre or reinstall if symptoms persist.
Re: (Score:2)
The best way would be to just make the user responsible. Require a license to use the internet. Make it 1Euro (since this is Germany) and no renewals no exams nothing; just like buying fishing license in the USA. Once you apply you have it. The license entitles you to have a personal computer system attached to public internet. You should still be free to use the internet at friends house library etc with no internet license.
I am not proposing any elaborate tracking scheme here either. All this would
Re: (Score:2)
No disrespect but that's the dumbest fucking idea I've ever heard.
Re: (Score:2)
This would also kill anonymity as we know it. Thus, no, this doesn't work.
Re: (Score:2)
1. This isn't the role of government.
I'd normally be the first to agree, but isn't a large portion of malware used for criminal activity? Identity theft, botnets that engage in DDoS extortion attempts, spam relays, phishing, etc, etc. It seems to me that law enforcement (i.e: government) has a legitimate interest in reducing the number of malware infections that are out there.
Of course, a call center filled with follow the script support drones probably isn't the best way to go about doing that.......
I would support the (what is likely not very costly in respect to other programs) spending of money on this kind of service to my countrymen. Rather I would prefer this kind of spending over other extremely tax-parasitic spending programs aimed at 'defending' us that cost us trillions here in the US.
Yeah, a 200 billion dollar bill to design a new fighter jet (on slashdot a few months ago), is a little excessive when 1) Our current jets and weapons are frikkin amazing and 2) people are all in a hissy about
Re: (Score:2)
If some some one sells you a car with defective locks, aren't they somewhat liable? WHy should you have to call someone who saya "change the locks at *your* expense." You've already paid for the car, why pay more?
Re: (Score:2)
If some some one sells you a car with defective locks, aren't they somewhat liable?
Car door locks are pretty weak, easily bypassed in most cars with appropriate tools. In many not so old cars, all that is needed is a screwdriver. They also don't prevent the car from being stolen by being towed, or broken into by breaking the glass. All of these are recognized and dealt with as criminal acts, and are insured against as an inevitable occurrence in a world that has the occasional nasty person in it. We don'
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd normally be the first to agree, but isn't a large portion of malware used for criminal activity? Identity theft, botnets that engage in DDoS extortion attempts, spam relays, phishing, etc, etc. It seems to me that law enforcement (i.e: government) has a legitimate interest in reducing the number of malware infections that are out there.
So they should go to the source of the malware infections: Microsoft. Microsoft needs to be held responsible for selling software that is so susceptible to malware. The
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't the role of government.
The role of a democratic government is precisely what the voting citizens define it to be. No more, and no less.
Re:Not really (Score:4, Insightful)
The full extent of that reasoning: if 51% of the people say the other 49% should be enslaved, the ballot makes it right.
Hell no, that can't be right. The purpose of the government is to uphold every citizen's inalienable rights; and it must be as small as it can be while remaining capable of fulfilling that purpose. No more, no less -- with emphasis on the "no more" bit.
Re:Not really (Score:4, Insightful)
The full extent of that reasoning: if 51% of the people say the other 49% should be enslaved, the ballot makes it right.
Not really; note that I said "citizens", not "majority of citizens".
In any case, show me a democratic government in which, if N% of people say that other 100-N% should be enslaved, they can't make it happen by legal means, for any value of N (keeping in mind such things as referendums, constitutional amendments, etc). U.S. is definitely not in that list, as its Constitution can be arbitrarily amended, given a supermajority - you could get slavery back tomorrow, or install absolute monarchy, if there was sufficient public support for it.
The only western country I can think of in which the ballot does not ultimately rule supreme is Germany with its "immutable" Constitutional provisions (that guarantee the "fundamental democratic character" of the system of government and certain basic human rights). It's fairly obvious, however, that with sufficient support, Constitution is just a piece of paper - it won't help you against a revolution by an armed mob, and then whatever laws they establish will become the law of the land. So in the end, pragmatically, it's always tyranny of the majority - it may be just more or less veiled.
The purpose of the government is to uphold every citizen's inalienable rights
Who determines what rights are inalienable? What if 51% and 49% disagree?
Re: (Score:2)
Hell no, that can't be right.
The purpose of the government is to uphold every citizen's inalienable rights; and it must be as small as it can be while remaining capable of fulfilling that purpose. No more, no less
There are no restrictions on amendments to the American Constitution. No greater formal barrier to repealing the 1st Amendment than the 18th, Prohibition.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for t
An alternative mission for government (Score:4, Interesting)
The purpose of the government is to uphold every citizen's inalienable rights; and it must be as small as it can be while remaining capable of fulfilling that purpose. No more, no less
I propose a different mission for government: in economist-lingo, to maximize social welfare (that is, the sum of how happy the population is).
And of course, the population should value freedom of {speech,assembly,press,etc.} very highly.
But---pregnant pause---there is such a thing as a market failure, and I think it makes good sense for the government to step in and make regulations that makes the market more competitive.
Observe that the societal material benefit of a free market comes about not because the market is free but because it's competitive.
If you're free to enter a market where you'll most certainly be crushed by the incumbent monopoly, what does that freedom really buy the society? But if the monopoly is prevented from using its monopoly status to crush you and has to compete reasonably fairly with you, you might have a shot at getting your better/cheaper product out to consumers.
If you're an American, you'll laugh at "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you." I don't. I know there's something shady going on, in particular with travel funds for the EU which the MEPs aren't held much accountable for [long story, but the point is if you-an-MEP travel not-extremely-extravagantly, you can pocket a large wad of my tax money at the end of the year. Some politicians do.]. But I also believe politicians (from time to time) genuinely want to do good for the people and the nation.
Re: (Score:2)
The role of a democratic government is precisely what the voting citizens define it to be. No more, and no less.
Not quite. If the citizens make decisions that make government undemocratic, then their decision is logically not part of the democratic process anymore (since the democratic process has ceased at that point).
Re: (Score:2)
No that's the role of the "tyranny of the majority" government. Not the liberal-democratic government.
"Tyranny of the majority" and "democracy" aren't incompatible. And I'm not sure where you've got the "liberal" part from, since it wasn't in my OP.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And I'm not sure where you've got the "liberal" part from, since it wasn't in my OP.
Well the 'liberal' part usually goes with liberal-democratic, so as to distinguish it from "democratic" as it is used in the sense the "German Democratic Republic" or the "Peoples Democratic Republic of Korea," 'liberal,' in this context referring to the support of private property rights and markets.
That being said, I agree with you almost completely when you write:The role of a democratic government is precisely what the
Re: (Score:2)
(If you are a citizen of Germany then there is nothing inconsistent about your 1 point.)
2. What if as a solution to the Malware problem they offer advice like "Have you tried Linux?"
Re: (Score:2)
If the largest number of machines was Apple, or Linux, or operating system abcdefg that operating system would have simular issues with malware.
The most used OS == biggest target. That being said, will the person at microsoft who decided that the first or default account is an administrator please stand up. You need to be beaten.
Re: (Score:2)
That being said, will the person at microsoft who decided that the first or default account is an administrator please stand up. You need to be beaten.
Yeah, I agree. That would be as bad as, say, having the admin user be the first user you set up on a linux box, or giving it a UID of 1. Wait...
Re: (Score:2)
"1. This isn't the role of government."
I don't know. I used to think government should just bugger off, and leave people alone. But, they insist on meddling in every facet of citizen's lives anyway. Hell, government spends 25 to 30% of my paycheck before I ever get to see how much I've earned!! If government is so intimately involved in all our lives anyway, government might as well slap around those people who ARE running a spambot from their machine. Knowingly, or not. Ain't no malware on MY machines
Re:Not really (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you know what you're talking about? What prevents a keylogger to log a user password on windows that do not prevent it in Linux?
Well UAC is built-in to the system. Windows just disables sending the keys to other apps while user is presented with UAC dialog.
But what about when you're running a terminal screen on your X desktop in Linux and sudo to root. Linux kernel nor sudo can't disable the equivalent api's because X, terminal window and several other hooks need to be able to get them. That is a problem with a system build from blocks.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you should have clarified that a software keylogger cannot intercept the password when user logging on, or in UAC elevation prompts. A hardware keylogger, quite obviously, doesn't care.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it's not like we are discussing about malware or anything. Or that the GP said "no user space programs can keylog".
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Yes, but it's almost completely ineffectual [pretentiousname.com]
Re: (Score:2)
or one thing any app (even a software keylogger) has to have the proper permissions to run in *nix.
Setting the execute bit is not difficult... if someone emails someone else a binary the execute bit will probably already be set. Or are you talking about some weird thing that I've never heard of?
Re:Not really (Score:4, Informative)
Setting the execute bit is not difficult...
Yes, but it has to be done. Which means you have to persuade someone to do it.
if someone emails someone else a binary the execute bit will probably already be set.
Set where? The mime type doesn't define "executable bit" anywhere. And even if it did (which it wouldn't because it's not tied to a particular family of OSes), any unixish mail user agent which honored that instruction and set the executable bit would be blasted out of the sky by thousands, if not millions, of irate users who know what a security risk it is, and the program would never be allowed in the repositories of any reputable distribution.
And even if that weren't true, and commonly used unix MUAs did generously set the executable bit for you (which, I reiterate, they don't), that still wouldn't help, because, unlike with MSDOS or its horrid descendents, the current directory is not in the executable PATH! And no MUA will save to anywhere where a program could normally be executed, so you'd either have to persuade the user to modify their path or specify a path designation when they try to execute your malware, so we're back to social engineering, even in our contrafactual universe.
Apparently, the "weird thing" you've never heard of is UNIX (or Linux or BSD). :)
Re: (Score:2)
The protections won't get set by the sender - they're set by the user settings, or by what the mail program causes them to be set as it saves the file to disk. These are usually managed through the umask settings [wikipedia.org].
It's possibly to get a key logger to run on a *nix system, but getting the logger onto the system is quite a bit less convenient for the bad guy, IMO. That said, if a user who would hit 'OK' to any random UAC popup is running on Linux, there is probably a way to social engineer them into doing s
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
But what do you need sudo for? Most malware that is trying to steal your info, send spam or whatever runs perfectly happy in user base.
You only need root access if you're trying to get control over the box, which is more of a hacking thing than what malware does.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that you know that I disagree. Linux does not have any form of autorun.
This does go back to what the grandparent poster was saying about flaws in XP that no longer exist in Windows 7.
At least, my Vista machine doesn't autorun (as in from the CD drive) anything, so I assume Win7 won't either. Probably I could still change the config in some way so it would, but that isn't really what you're getting at, I don't think.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Thanks for joining the discussion friend. Now go back and review what he and I have shared on the subject to get some context on what I said. You may have to subscribe to slashdot to get the good bits.
Windows still has autorun even in W7. They've limited it, but it's still there [theregister.co.uk].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As it is, the summary reads "A government decided to do something to help their less computer-savvy citizens. Here's my rant against microsoft with no bearing on reality. Please go to my blog."
Re: (Score:2)
Government provides product specific help for free (Score:2)
I fail to see how government specific help around one specific product from one specific company, is not a bailout. They are reducing Microsoft support costs, pure and simple...
How would it fly if the government were spending money to pay for gas for one specific brand of car?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The thing is, as we don't care so much about how to properly feed, exercise and clean ponies, normal people don't care so much about computer security. They just want to do their thing.
So... are you suggesting that you just want to.... "do your thing" with a pony?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Agreed; Mac users are no more bright, so they should set up a call center for Mac OS X malware infections too, though they could staff it less, perhaps with one person. Oh wait, Mac OS X doesn't have the malware level as Windows, even given the same level of user carelessness.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, your comment reminded me of this old Apple commercial (needs Quicktime): http://pulsar.esm.psu.edu/Faculty/Gray/graphics/movies/fullsupport.mov [psu.edu]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the article is pretty clear that the ISP will use patterns (not the existence or presence of antivirus, which they really couldn't detect effectively anyway) to determine if a computer is infected with a bot.
The first step will be to contact the infected user and/or put up a custom web page that they will default to letting them know about the infection. That will be done by the ISP. The ISP will then refer them to the new advisory center to get the infection cleaned up.
I think part of the advice woul
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For the most part I tend to agree. Any user installed Trojan is the users responsibly.
If the malware gets installed through an exploit then it is the OS/Applications fault.
In a good amount of cases it is no longer Microsoft's fault.
Re:Not really (Score:4, Interesting)
That does seem to be the case. Most of the in the wild exploits these days are targeting applications like Acrobat and Flash because the underlying OS has been hardened to the point that remote exploits are becoming harder to come by.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There is one platform out there that's resistant to the dancing bunnies problem.
The iPhone.
Unfortunately, that's the only way to be resistant to it - don't allow third-party software unless it's been inspected by real people whose job it is to inspect it.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, I said it was resistant to dancing bunnies, not any other attack vector.
Dancing bunnies is an attack vector used by trojans to get the user to disable their security on their own, no software or hardware vulnerabilities needed.
Re:Not really (Score:4, Insightful)
Like any other OS, you can run Windows securely if you don't do stupid things.
Like any car, you can parallel park an 18-wheeler, if you are careful enough.
Sure, you can do it. Some OSes just make it easier, and some make it a challenge. I dare say Windos (any version) is in the later category. Heck, it usually comes with a fine selection of ad- and spyware pre-installed thanks to your friendly OEM.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. It's due to crappy insecure software. As long as they get a free ride they have no reason to fix it.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is, as we don't care so much about how to properly feed, exercise and clean ponies, normal people don't care so much about computer security.
Oh, what a cop out!
Most of us don't care about the care and feeding of ponies because.... most of us don't have ponies to care for and feed.
On the other hand, most of us do have computers.
Most of us also have cars, and even though most of us do not have mechanical engineering degrees, we know the basics of maintaining them, either ourselves or having someone else do it, because we know negligence can be very expensive. Using public resources to bail out computer user mistakes due to ignorance and negligence
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
I have to disagree with that. Malware problem is usually because of user stupidity. Like any other OS, you can run Windows securely if you don't do stupid things.
You're exhibiting typical programmer stupidity. Hard as it may be to believe, most people in this world don't give a damn about software, they just want to get their work done. They don't want to be pestered by annoying dialogs, and they certainly don't want to understand security just in order to browse the web or use their PC without virus infe
Re:Windows is vulnerable because that is profitabl (Score:4, Funny)
Does that mean users of Apple computers are far smarter than users of Windows computers?
Well duh. They picked Apple, didn't they?
Re:What I heard (Score:4, Informative)
If you actually RTFA (not the blog one, which is from the submitter himself), it never mentions Microsoft anywhere. Nor do the german press releases.
Re: (Score:2)
Spend money? Why would you do that when the free anti-virus softwares are far superior to their commercial counterparts. As for the rest of your options the only one that's even remotely valid is not using IE, I presume your 2nd and 4th options are just jokes.
Signed a windows user who has never been infected (and has checked his logs recently to verify that fact).
Re: (Score:2)
But how would that be different on any other OS? If the application has a vulnerability that lets the attacker execute code on user base, it doesn't matter what the OS is. Unless it's locked down OS like iPhone.
Dumbfounded (Score:2)
This is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Is this just a government make work project or something?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Is this just a government make work project or something?
My income is based on government make work projects you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Dumbfounded (Score:5, Funny)
My income is based on government make work projects you insensitive clod!
So do you work for DOT and vote Democrat or for a defense contractor and vote Republican? ;)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm independently lazy, you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:2)
Is this just a government make work project or something?
One could argue that will save the government work in the long run, given that many malware installations are used for criminal activity ranging from identity theft to extortion.
Of course that doesn't mean it isn't a make work project or that this is the best way to go about combating the malware threat.
Too small a staff (Score:2)
Re:Too small a staff (Score:4, Informative)
This is not an open support desk, at least that's not what the article describes. This is a "referral of last resort" from an ISP to this support desk. In your case, you'd probably still field most of the calls, but your friends and family would say "my Internet people just called me and said I have worms or a cold or something, and that they'll stop my Internet unless I fix it. Help!"
Based on what I'm reading in the article, here's how a general fix would go:
1. ISP detects malware patterns coming from one of their users.
2. ISP contacts customer, says "you appear to have a virus that is doing bad things on the network. Please fix it." or pops a web page with the same message and probably a link to an antivirus solution.
3. (assuming user doesn't know how to install AV software) ISP refers customer to government call center.
If the customer refuses to fix the problem or turns out to be unable to do so even with help, then the German government needs to figure out what they want to do. Shut the user off? Attempt to have the ISP block the malware with port blocking? Some interesting and perhaps disturbing possibilities there.
Re: (Score:2)
ISP contacts customer, says "you appear to have a virus that is doing bad things on the network. Please fix it." or pops a web page with the same message and probably a link to an antivirus solution.
Popping up a web page would be an extraordinarily bad idea, given how many popup/banner ads, malicious web pages, and adware are already out there selling fake antivirus software.
Meh, no big deal (Score:2)
It doesn't say "for Microsoft" (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It doesn't say "for Microsoft" (Score:5, Funny)
In fact it states that this new service is for all users with all operating systems. So while indeed 99% of all users run Microsoft, niche systems like Linux and Mac will be helped too.
I like the way you think.
It's very different from the support centers that I call with hardware problems - like when an update bricked my router - that suggested I:
a) re-install Linux to fix the problem,
alternately, b) don't use a Mac, because they don't do REAL networking,
c) if I were only using Windows, I wouldn't be having this problem,
and my favorite -
d) I must be lying because no one has three operating systems in their house - and if I do, then maybe that's what bricked my router.
But - as I said, I like the way you think, and I wish them many good lucks with this endeavor.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
This. This this this.
The number of times I've had to explain to my ISPs tech support that they just need to tell me what they want, as opposed to which button in XP to click, at one point got so bad that I feel I was justified in pirating Windows just so I could dual boot into it for those idiots. I had a friend once who was getting a slow connection speed from his router to the ISP, and they told him he'd have to get Windows before they could help him, because they don't support Linux.
Normally with these p
Lost in translation (Score:4, Insightful)
Hmmm..... Neither headline nor summary fits the news. Nothing in the quoted article mentions windows. The article itself is focussing on a small aspect of what is being discussed. Some parts of the discussion would be very negative for Windows users. E.g. it is being discussed to disconnect users from the Internet who don't fix their PCs when attacks originate from them. I don't agree with a lot of things discussed, but they didn't do anything to deserve a /. summary like this.
CU, Martin
Bailout for economy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Because exhausted call center employees will force government to hire more staff."
Or put "Arbeit Macht Frei" over the gate to the call center.
So AAA is a bailout for Ford Motors? (Score:4, Informative)
If Macs were the big dog in the OS world, would you then be calling it an Apple Bailout?
By the way, don't buy into the apple myths. They have malware and bugs aplenty, they just don't have enough population density to encourage easy transmittal, or even be a tempting target for malware creators. Those scum want to get as many machines as possible, so only niche diehards or those who want to prove a point bother to infect anything with less than a 40% market share. Guess what that means... yeah, that's right, they go after Windows. If you flip-flop the percentages, you'll see a total shift in what they target. And that's not guesswork or rhetoric.
Personally I know of many reasons to complain about Microsoft, and Apple, and the Linux community. None are perfect, and all have nuts, fanatics, and total wackjobs. Pick your poison and learn how to use it safely.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They (Macs) have malware and bugs aplenty,...
Please list all non-trojan malware for OSX. Even a small sampling will suffice. Hell, even one would suffice.
(Bugs? Certainly. Trojans? There have been roughly a handful of variants that require a user to find a shady pr0n website, download the trojan, then enter an admin password in spite of all warnings telling them that it might not be a good idea... one simply cannot fix stupid).
Anyrate - let me know what you find.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Malware (Score:2)
Will it actually work? (Score:4, Insightful)
I've been cleaning up other people's infected Windows machines for longer than I have wanted to. It seems like nine times out of ten, the only way to ensure that the computer is clean after it gets infected is to do a complete pave and rebuild of the OS. That level of complexity isn't something that a tech support person can walk an average user through over the phone. Forget about backing up the data beforehand, or re-installing the applications after the fact.
I like the idea. The way that the article is worded is complete flamebait though. I think we can all agree that steps need to be taken to reduce the number of malware infected Windows boxes on the internet. Doing so makes the internet a better place for everyone. It just seems to me like the Germans are taking on an impossible task. Once a Windows box is owned, it stays owned.
On a related tangent, I think things could be better if ISPs institute the equivalent of a "good driver discount". Give the owners of clean computers a discount on their monthly service fee. I'm not an economist, but it seems like it would need to be enough of a discount to cover the cost of having a "professional" setup the computer right in the first place. I see advertisements where I live that claim to clean malware infected computers for $30-50. So a discount of $5 a month seems about right. On the other hand, if the discount isn't high enough, then the incentive won't be strong enough to encourage people to keep their computers clean. At that point maybe the ISPs need a stick, instead of a carrot. Perhaps throttling the connection, or re-directing to a subset of URLs for how to deal with malware infections.
discouraging them from writing better code? (Score:2)
Not that I feel particular affected (Score:2)
Maybe it should be set up in Munich they should have some clue about installing Linux.
Now I remember that I just recently had to cleanup somebody's computer and didn't install Linux. Damn, I have become so complacent.
sucking off the government teat (Score:2)
how long are we going to put up with this corporate welfare? Bank bailout,subsidies for oil and gas companies, subsides for agribusiness etc. I need money, why can't I get it? I pay more in taxes than any of those scum bags.
Okay then... (Score:2)
PROFIT!
The Call Center is Apply Named (Score:2)
I can't help but wonder if this might be a way for folks to be directed to Knoppix? [knoppix.net]
My own bailout (Score:2)
I'll provide my own bailout to the world and seed ubuntu-9.10-desktop-amd64.iso.torrent a bit longer.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Step 1: Back up your data. Step 2: Install SUSE Linux. Step 3: Profit? Step 4: Laugh at Microsoft. [schadenfreude here]
schadenfreude
I got this part:
schadenfreude
Re:wrong funding strategy (Score:4, Insightful)
The ISPs should be free to charge end users rates based on the OS the end user is doing.
Are you completely insane? (And I'm asking that in the friendliest voice.)
Do you have any idea just how quickly that would turn into unprovable organized crime?
Because after all, this scenario could happen very quickly: OS Company A goes to the ISP X, and cites incentives, rebates or outright kickbacks for lower rates for OS A - while OS B and OS C are surcharged. An especially effective scenario if OS Company A just happens to be the one with the most trouble - and the most cash to throw around to shore up market share.
And OS Company A even helps the ISP with metrics to show that they're product is better / safer - whether it is or not. Example - 80% of all of one ISP's malware troubles come from OS A. (In the pretend-reality of my example, it could be coming from a handful of lost souls). But - OS A has a 90% market share - so it's mal-rate of 80% being less than the market penetration of 90% makes it .... better.
And how would OS B or C make up for the other 20% of hits? OS A would simply have to put a purposefully-infected - heavily infected - OS B or OS C machine on that ISP's net - and the lie with statistics is complete.
Like insurance rates for different drivers of different cars as end users present threats to the net based on their OS and experience the rates charged to support a malware elimination office should depend on what is being connected.
You get much better insurance than I do. In the USA, they tell us that that's what the rates are based on - but in reality, nothing I drive never ends up with an insurance reduction.
They take you for every nickel that they can imagine ways to justify and get from you.
Re: (Score:2)
You get much better insurance than I do. In the USA, they tell us that that's what the rates are based on - but in reality, nothing I drive never ends up with an insurance reduction.
They take you for every nickel that they can imagine ways to justify and get from you.
I think it's time for you to change insurance companies then. In fifteen years I've driven close to ten different vehicles. Over the course of fifteen years I've had everything from a perfect driving record almost all the way to the other ex
Re: (Score:2)
No, I've been driving for close to 40 years - and have usually maintained zero points (had at most whatever a stop sign in a residential zone got me) and very few new cars (2). And I'm not a total idiot at buying insurance. Maybe with your record and less experience over time, you've saved money when backing away from probation and so forth.
If you're a lifelong safe driver, the rates do not steadily decrease to reward your great driving - despite the commercials.
Oh no - you work for a living - let's check
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that was supposed to say that reaction time will increase. See? I just proved their case. :-P
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that if you're a consistently good driver and keep the same vehicle, the only time you are going to see rate reductions is when you pass those age gateways. For most people I know they saw a reduction when they turned 25. If you're getting dinged for mileage then your broker isn't treating you very well. I've been with State Farm except for a brief period when my driving record was so bad that I had to go with a special AllState program for terrible drivers. I've always had a 15,000 mile a year
Re: (Score:2)
I turned 25 after the introduction of no-fault insurance - that actually did lower my rates - in one state. I moved to a fault state - rates went up - then they adopted "no fault" - had no similarity whatsoever to the true no-fault goodness I'd gotten elsewhere - and they upped rates again. That was between 19 and 25 for me.
It varies by generation and state as well, I suppose. When I was 25, I was promised reductions when I turned 40. When I turned 40, the "new" data came out - bye bye reduction.
Re: (Score:2)
All of the problems with multiple computers and OS's behind a single internet line beside, they would never do it that complicated but just charge the extra fees from all users equally.
Re:"Hello, Malware center".. (Score:5, Funny)
"Hi, I'm calling about malware on my PC"?
"Buy a Mac". *click*
Same caller a while later:
"Hi, I've bought a Mac and installed XP on it, but, ugh... it seems to be slow again..."
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Smart call center:
"Hi, I'm calling about malware on my PC"
"Ok, install this weird Linux distro from the 1990s"
(the next day) "Tried the Linux, but the internet isn't working"
"Good, that means your computer is secure now"
Hey... (Score:2, Troll)
You can buy UIDs too.
Usually people go for those 3-digit UIDs but not everyone has the money for that.
Generally, if you have money to buy Apple products, you have a habit of solving your problems by shopping and you have money to spare.
But oddly you can't buy intelligence (Score:2)
You can buy UIDs too.
Indeed, but why would I do so since I am perfectly happy with this one?
Unless, SuperKendall is really like the Dread Pirate Roberts. Confidentially, you just lost your spot in line there.
Generally, if you have money to buy Apple products, you have a habit of solving your problems by shopping and you have money to spare.
Oddly, I value my time (and UNIX) far more than money which is why I have Mac products to begin with. But do feel free to fritter your time away on "cheaper" PC's (that
Re: (Score:2)
But do feel free to fritter your time away on "cheaper" PC's (that you buy twice as often) so that you can afford to buy a lower ID than mine and "win"!
Win what? There is a contest here? I thought we were making stupid "Yo mama.." jokes.
Only with references to OS(s)/hardware/UIDs instead of mothers.
you can afford to buy a lower ID
Why would I do that? My UID is beautiful.
Re: (Score:2)
"Unfortunately none of those calling in will be following the one step solution; stop going to German porn sites on a windows box." /me boots Windows in a VM and sets out to research the problem...
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, because the same ignorant people who log in to Windows with an admin account, will definatly not log into Linus with a root account exposing them to the same issues on Linux.
This is a stupid user bailout NOT M$ bailout.