Comments on: House of Lords Personal Internet Security Report released http://www.getsafeonlineblog.org/house-of-lords-personal-internet-security-report-released News, tips and updates from the GetSafeOnline.org team Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:39:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Get Safe Online (The Blog) / Get Safe Online summit http://www.getsafeonlineblog.org/house-of-lords-personal-internet-security-report-released/comment-page-1#comment-116839 Get Safe Online (The Blog) / Get Safe Online summit Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:13:08 +0000 http://www.getsafeonlineblog.org/?p=157#comment-116839 [...] our MD, kicked off proceedings. He talked about the roadshow this week. He also mentioned the House of Lords report and the government’s reply; both of which endorsed what we are [...] [...] our MD, kicked off proceedings. He talked about the roadshow this week. He also mentioned the House of Lords report and the government’s reply; both of which endorsed what we are [...]

]]> By: Rupert Wilson http://www.getsafeonlineblog.org/house-of-lords-personal-internet-security-report-released/comment-page-1#comment-101368 Rupert Wilson Thu, 04 Oct 2007 11:12:10 +0000 http://www.getsafeonlineblog.org/?p=157#comment-101368 If the totality of problems with virus and trojans occur on Microsoft Windows computers and not on computers running Linux, MAC OS, etc. then I suggest we should first hold Microsoft accountable; various of our laws would allow us to demand compensation and certainly a refund since the products are clearly not fit for purpose, which purpose must surely include the provision of a reasonably secure platform from which to connect to and benefit from the Internet and email. It would be good if the basis on which ISPs monitor traffic and block specific IP addresses to curtail negative traffic (trojans connecting to known sources of malign code), and, ultimately, disconnect customers whose computers are identified as being compromised (infected with trojans/viruses). I suggest we all ought take some responsibility for taking a look, as soon as possible, at a computer running Linux - you can boot any PC from a LiveCD of Linux, I suggest Ubuntu Linux as being quite easy, without making any changes to your computer hard drive, and thus see for yourself what options you have other than to run Microsofts vulnerable OS'. The other option being to make your next computer an Apple MAC. And, no, I do not work for Apple Inc. nor for any Linux group. I make most of my income from supporting users with problems, often Viruses and trojans, on their Microsoft Windows computers. I have yet to find anyone with Windows Vista not having huge problems and wrote to Which? Consumers Association telling them that recommending people upgrade (their words) to Vista by 2009 was quite the worst advice I could imagine - Windows XP whilst not secure will receive security updates until 2014. Plenty of time to consider MAC or Linux. If the totality of problems with virus and trojans occur on Microsoft Windows computers and not on computers running Linux, MAC OS, etc. then I suggest we should first hold Microsoft accountable; various of our laws would allow us to demand compensation and certainly a refund since the products are clearly not fit for purpose, which purpose must surely include the provision of a reasonably secure platform from which to connect to and benefit from the Internet and email.

It would be good if the basis on which ISPs monitor traffic and block specific IP addresses to curtail negative traffic (trojans connecting to known sources of malign code), and, ultimately, disconnect customers whose computers are identified as being compromised (infected with trojans/viruses).

I suggest we all ought take some responsibility for taking a look, as soon as possible, at a computer running Linux – you can boot any PC from a LiveCD of Linux, I suggest Ubuntu Linux as being quite easy, without making any changes to your computer hard drive, and thus see for yourself what options you have other than to run Microsofts vulnerable OS’. The other option being to make your next computer an Apple MAC.
And, no, I do not work for Apple Inc. nor for any Linux group. I make most of my income from supporting users with problems, often Viruses and trojans, on their Microsoft Windows computers.
I have yet to find anyone with Windows Vista not having huge problems and wrote to Which? Consumers Association telling them that recommending people upgrade (their words) to Vista by 2009 was quite the worst advice I could imagine – Windows XP whilst not secure will receive security updates until 2014. Plenty of time to consider MAC or Linux.

]]> By: Derrick Bates http://www.getsafeonlineblog.org/house-of-lords-personal-internet-security-report-released/comment-page-1#comment-76734 Derrick Bates Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:35:40 +0000 http://www.getsafeonlineblog.org/?p=157#comment-76734 Holding ISPs responsible for spam and other types of fraudulent activity perpetrated through their channels is fine as long as there is the will to carry it through. However, we desperately need a new high tech crime unit that is not directed solely at counter terrorism but can address the wider picture of international spam and identity theft. It may even prove to be the case that some of this spam and phishing funds terrorist activity and may dovetail into the mainstream of such intelligence gathering. Holding ISPs responsible for spam and other types of fraudulent activity perpetrated through their channels is fine as long as there is the will to carry it through. However, we desperately need a new high tech crime unit that is not directed solely at counter terrorism but can address the wider picture of international spam and identity theft. It may even prove to be the case that some of this spam and phishing funds terrorist activity and may dovetail into the mainstream of such intelligence gathering.

]]> By: Dave Budd http://www.getsafeonlineblog.org/house-of-lords-personal-internet-security-report-released/comment-page-1#comment-76135 Dave Budd Sat, 11 Aug 2007 08:49:11 +0000 http://www.getsafeonlineblog.org/?p=157#comment-76135 My view is that the ISPs should carry a large amount of responsibility for spam type fraud. They must see the large amounts of traffic generated on their own network so they have a responsibility to investigate and close it down. Equally, other ISPs must observe where high levels of spam activity are coming from and attempt to block the ISP responsible if that ISP isn't cooperative. My view is that the ISPs should carry a large amount of responsibility for spam type fraud. They must see the large amounts of traffic generated on their own network so they have a responsibility to investigate and close it down. Equally, other ISPs must observe where high levels of spam activity are coming from and attempt to block the ISP responsible if that ISP isn’t cooperative.

]]>