On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Chris McQuistion <[email protected]> wrote: > While I agree with your assessment, you have to consider that a serious > cyber attack could (and probably would) include multiple vectors and have > multiple delivery mechanisms. We can't just blame the guy with a 10 year > old Windows XP machine with no firewall. > One thing Stuxnet taught us is that machines that AREN'T connected to the > Internet can be successfully attacked by using spearphishing and different > delivery mechanisms. Stuxnet is considered by some to not even be very > advanced. God help us if we get something really advanced created and aimed > at us!
It also shows that the consumer (and industrial .. thanks stuxnet) computing world right now has a big, soft underbelly. There's no evidence to say that more computers that do industrial control, that are home desktops, that are DoD owned, etc aren't infected with more targeted malware. Nor it there any way to prove that there haven't been manufacturing line code injection into firmware or hosting compromises for widely used software. The more you think about security and privacy with computing, the sadder it'll probably make you. There's certainly nothing our government is going to be able to do in the short term to magically change this. :/ At least with the extra interest in security these days, maybe we'll see some improvement driven by consumers ... right? ;) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NLUG" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nlug-talk?hl=en
