All valid points. I'm sure there must be measures that an ISP takes when it sees massive amounts of traffic coming from one user.
I'm not sure why Microsoft doesn't build in anti-virus software right into Windows. I wonder if at some point the Government will step in and require licensing for individual computers. I suspect a network full of zombie computers waiting to attack key commercial or military sites would be a national security issue. --- David Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The idea of security prerequisites on the ISP level > looks good on paper but > is really a bad idea that opens the door to many, > many problems. A few > examples: > > ... ISP's being put into the position of dictating > what "secure" is. Soon > only "approved" software will be accepted, > regardless of how good it is. To > entrust a commercial entity with that sort of > decision making power is > unthinkable. In essence, they are dictating what is > on your PC, and that's > just wrong, and it's wrong all day long. > > ... I think there is a valid argument to be made > regarding the necessity of > anti-spyware, and to some degree, anti-virus > software. A Mac user, a Linux > user and a Windows user have significantly different > inherent risks to > malware, and a one size fits all approach doesn't > work. I would imagine most > members ProFox have different and likely more safe > surfing habits ( > generally speaking) than Mom and Dad Walmart or Suzy > Myspace. > > ... Up to date doesn't necessarily mean better ( A > quick visit to the public > Windows Update bug forums will cure you of any > delusions you may be holding > about this). Additionally, older versions of most > popular antivirus and > antispyware are typically significantly less > intrusive and bloated than > their modern counterparts. McAfee and Norton AV, I'm > talkin' to you. There > is such a profitable business model built up around > selling fear to the > public and then cashing in as they purchase ( often > ) unnecessary software > in order to feel safe that it makes me ill to think > about it. > > In defense of your initial concept, I do agree that > the owner/administrator > of a private network has every right to dictate > security minimums to guest > users prior to their connections. This, especially > when handling potentially > sensitive data, is a smart move. But, I think the > key word here is > "private". If ISP's really wanted to do something > about the spam, the > botnets and the other malicious critters out there > they could do so, as the > tracking and blacklisting of poisonous servers isn't > rocket science, and > blacklisting can and does happen already. They could > do this without > pestering the average user, trying to sell them > something, or using fear to > goad them. Wouldn't that be nice? > > > > > > > David Smith > Systems Administrator > Doan Family of Dealerships > (585) 352-6600 ext.1730 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Michael Madigan > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 2:34 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [NF] Secure computers > > OK, I got into a real fight with someone this week > on requiring a computer > be secure before it is attached to a network. > > By secure I mean, anti-spyware, anti-virus, > up-to-date on patches, and > firewall. > > It got me to thinking, do you think it would be > wise, somehow, for ISPs to > require anti-virus and anti-spyware to be running on > a computer before it's > allowed to connect to their system? And how would > it be implemented. > > My thoughts are that if every computer was secure, > we would have far less > Internet traffic caused by spambots, and would > actually give us a much > better Internet experience. > > Any thoughts? > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
