Tearing Apart a Hard-Sell Anti-Virus Ad 192
climenole writes "I came across an email sent by a security vendor, reminding me, no urging me with the liver-transplant sort of urgency, to renew my subscription to their product, lest my pixels perish. I spent a minute or two staring at the email, thinking about all the poor souls out there who do not have the comfort of being a geek and who may actually take the advertisement seriously." That led to this insightful deconstruction of these over-the-top ads, the kind that make it hard to keep straight the malware makers and the anti-malware makers.
So you know they're there (Score:5, Insightful)
Friend of mine has the most annoying product ever. Whenever it updates itself, it plays a recording of a voice saying "virus database updated". So we'll just be sitting there and hear that. Since a well-functioning anti-virus just does its thing without bugging the user for the most part, the ones that are for profit have to make themselves loudly obvious and play up the threat level (not to imply there isn't one of course).
I'm not convinced anti-viruses are any better than snake oil, really. Some like Norton are basically viri themselves, slowing your system to a crawl, and all they can do is look for fingerprints of known viri. Sure they can occasionally be bandaids on a sucking chest wound, but the main key to windows security is to not expect it, stay updated, avoid IE, and not run random programs strangers email you. Sure there might be a 0 day in your browser or mail client that causes something like a picture to execute code, but those aren't the main uses.
*gets off rantbox*
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
When I think the default settings are manipulative instead of just incompetent or a bad fit for me? Yes, I do think that's a good reason to distrust a product and the company that makes it.
Re:So you know they're there (Score:4, Insightful)
The core problem is that security is only good security when it's transparent to the user. Of course, users won't buy products that appear to do nothing for them (even if they did actually work perfectly well), thus vendors are forced to produce bad software so that people will buy it.
Re:So you know they're there (Score:5, Informative)
Whenever it updates itself, it plays a recording of a voice saying "virus database updated". So we'll just be sitting there and hear that. Since a well-functioning anti-virus just does its thing without bugging the user for the most part, the ones that are for profit have to make themselves loudly obvious and play up the threat level (not to imply there isn't one of course).
As other said, it sounds like Avast, and is a easy enough default to change. BTW, while they do sell it, there is also a free version for non-commercial users. Frankly the free version of Avast seems to do a better job than Norton and McAfee by far and IME better than NOD32 and Kaspersky.
Re:So you know they're there (Score:4, Informative)
While I think it's atrocious that Windows has to have a third-party layer akin to the FDA to keep users from getting waylaid by malicious code, I'm a little surprised that you think Avast is better than NOD32 or Kaspersky. The most recent AV-Comparatives report is rather unflattering to Avast. I'm personally a NOD32 (ESET) fan.
http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_report26.pdf [av-comparatives.org]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess it all depends on what you expect an "anti-virus" program to do. I'm only concerned with Avast looking for viruses and none of the other things listed in the link you posted. ESET detected 183 viruses vs. 182 by Avast, which is virtually identical. Kapersky only detected 105, which makes Avast better in my mind.
I pretty much gave up on NOD32 on my work system when it got hit with Winfixer and ESET missed it. Spybot had no problems with it though and also detected several hundred other trojans that N
Re:So you know they're there (Score:5, Informative)
While I think it's atrocious that Windows has to have a third-party layer
They don't. I have been using MS Security Essentials for a year now, on several XP, Vista (ugh) and W7 boxes (over a dozen). Uses less resources than even AVG, and haven't had a single virus yet, even with all the stupid browsing that gets done by users. And it is free.
It is sad that you need AV, but at least it is now free, good quality (relatively speaking) and works as good as or better than the average. Of course, I still would rather we switched the whole office to Linux or BSD, but if you have to use Windows, you don't have to use a 3rd party AV solution.
Re: (Score:2)
and haven't had a single virus yet that was detected, even with all the stupid browsing that gets done by users.
There, fixed that for ya. ...considering that the detection rates of that thing are a complete joke.
Re: (Score:2)
While I think it's atrocious that Windows has to have a third-party layer
They don't. I have been using MS Security Essentials for a year now...
I guess it's technically not a third-party solution, but it still has to be installed like one. That's what is truly a shame. Why couldn't they have just made it secure to begin with! Then we wouldn't have to worry about this shit in the first place. So you'll have to pardon me for not having much faith in it now.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a fan of MS either, but we have no choice on the corporate desktop. AV is a shim, but it is as well on Linux if you run AV. Windows 7 is honestly much better than XP even if it is still flawed, but then again, XP was designed a decade ago. I'm just buying time until Linux is more desktop ready than it currently is. Now on the server, I've not run Windows in over 10 years.
My problem with MS isn't about the usability of Windows. It is still easier on the desktop than Linux, although that is more
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
But is your name Dave?
Re: (Score:2)
No, you’re not. :)
We were promised smart speech interfaces all our lives, so I better damn can at least act as if.
Oh, and a tiny script will allow you to let it answer “You’re welcome!”. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
AV does not protect against 0 day exploits
Re: (Score:2)
Not yet. But we're working on it.
Re: (Score:2)
You know, all your friend has to do is open up the settings dialog and turn off audio notification. It's about three clicks of the mouse and then all of those messages will disappear.
Just because you're using Windows doesn't mean you have to accept every annoying misfeature of every application as normal.
Re: (Score:2)
There are some like Norton (Boss: "We don't say anything bad about our competition. So when someone raises the topic Norton, we say 'Norton is packaged in a really well designed looking box'"). And I can understand why they have to dig into the system so deeply. Simply because they, being big players in the AV biz, have become targets for malware themselves. So it has become a battle between these companies and the malware writers who can dig deeper into the system and make sure the other one cannot uproot
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'd say about a quarter of the completely messed up machines I've seen have come from AntiVirus software that went rogue and deleted large chunks of the system. The only systems that I've had to entirely re-flash were from said destructive AV software. And all of those were either McAfee or Norton.
Re: (Score:2)
Boss: "We don't say anything bad about our competition. So when someone raises the topic MyAfee, you excuse yourself and go to the bathroom, and you better hope the topic changes before you return. To be sure, make it a long dump."
Re: (Score:2)
in the middle of the night:"virus database updated!"
when you plug in a friend's usb drive: "[loud siren]Attention!! A virus has been detected!!"
its cool and scifi!! unfortunately avast also made my pc slow as molasses and then msse was released.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Viruses please. And calluses, octopuses, platypuses, polypuses. Thank you, that is all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...but the main key to windows security is to not expect it...
The main key for ANY security is not to expect it.
Re: (Score:2)
No ... it's much easier to stop Avast.
The person who designed Windows' "sounds" dialog needs to be taken out back and shot.
Re: (Score:2)
ClamAV makes a great scanner for a questionable torrent file anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
going into setting is how you disable sound.
Re: (Score:2)
When an antivirus subscription expires, it's an excellent time to reconsider your OS selection. Here's my story...
For a while, one of my Christmas presents for my wife every year was her NortonAV re-up subscription.
SNIP
Now I take that $50 every Christmas and buy her something from Victoria Secrets. A gift that keeps on giving ;)... instead of taking.
Be sure to package it in a Norton box and tell here you need to do a thorough install and check to see if it works.
Of course, if the protection fails...
Spam exclusion (Score:2, Interesting)
Little known, though highly comical peice of info, is back in the day the McAfee spam filter constantly triggered on the McAfee advertising emails. You'd think the marketing guys would have figured out their techniques needed adjustment... but instead the smart ones at the top demanded a fix... so the engineers built an exclusion into the software for anything coming from the company... becuase clearly that was the right course of action. I'm not at all surprised their 'emails' can't be distinguished from P
Danger! Bad Times Virus!!! (Score:4, Funny)
If you receive an e-mail with a subject of Badtimes, delete it immediately WITHOUT READING IT. This is the most DANGEROUS e-mail virus ever.
It will rewrite your hard drive and scramble any disks that are even close to your computer. It will recalibrate your freezer's coolness setting so all your ice cream melts. It will demagnetize the strips on all your credit cards, screw up the tracking on your VCR, and use subspace field harmonics to render any CDs you try to play unreadable.
It will give your ex-boy/girlfriend/ex-husband/wife your new phone number. It will mix antifreeze into your fishtank. It will drink all your beer and leave its socks out on the coffee table when company comes over. It will put a kitten in the back pocket of your good suit and hide your car keys when you are late for work.
Badtimes will make you fall in love with a penguin. It will give you nightmares about circus midgets. It will pour sugar in your gas tank and shave off both your eyebrows while dating your current boy/girlfriend behind your back and billing the dinner and hotel room to your Visa card.
It moves your car randomly around parking lots so you can't find it. It will tease your dog. It will leave strange messages on your boss's voicemail in your voice. It is insidious and subtle. It is dangerous and terrifying to behold. It is also a rather interesting shade of mauve.
Badtimes will give you Dutch Elm disease. It will leave the toilet seat up. It will make a batch of methamphetamine in your bathtub and leave bacon cooking on the stove while it goes out to chase high school kids with your snowblower.
These are just a few of the signs. Be very, very afraid!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What? Badtimes is my Ex??
McAfee is for noobs (Score:5, Informative)
McAfee is for those who have no idea and therefore the warnings make perfect sense. Ethically wrong, sure. Its been made up by the marketing department with the sole purpose of getting the likely clueless user to cough up. And that i'm sure they do. Tobacco causes cancer yet cigarette companies will still do whatever they can to flog their products to anyone who will buy them. It doesnt mean its right. What do you think about Microsofts 'Windows Genuine Advantage' program? It does absolutely nothing for the user but certainly helps Microsoft make a lot more money. Yet its pushed as giving some sort of advantage.
Re:McAfee is for noobs (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not any more ethically wrong than anything else. The REAL problem are those "YOU HAVE A VIRUS CLICK HERE" fake-windows webpages. Even if you know better sometimes finding a way out can be tricky because the fuckers have started opening "OK" boxes over where you'd normally click to close the window.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Tobacco causes cancer yet cigarette companies will still do whatever they can to flog their products to anyone who will buy them. It doesnt mean its right.
I enjoy tobacco and don't mind dying younger. They're not doing anything wrong by supplying what I ask of them. They might be abusing dimlows but that does not mean they're abusing me. What they are doing _is_ right. AV vendors on the other hand only have a business from abusing dimlows - anyone who knows anything about it will generally either use
Re:McAfee is for noobs (Score:4, Insightful)
do you wish to assert that your dying young is not going to have some sort of social cost I have to pick up?
I question the dimbulb argument. I have a very nice IQ. No doubt I am a dimbulb here and there anyway. But tobacco has often been a big issue in my life. And I come out of an era where tobacco company out and out lies are well established. I wonder how I should process your remarks.
Lastly your argument would also support giving out smack on the street corner. Somehow, I suspect that you would find making that argument inconvenient.
Re: (Score:2)
do you wish to assert that your dying young is not going to have some sort of social cost I have to pick up?
I question the dimbulb argument. I have a very nice IQ. No doubt I am a dimbulb here and there anyway. But tobacco has often been a big issue in my life. And I come out of an era where tobacco company out and out lies are well established. I wonder how I should process your remarks.
Lastly your argument would also support giving out smack on the street corner. Somehow, I suspect that you would find making that argument inconvenient.
Well, good, because I have absolutely zero problems with making the argument that giving out smack should be legal.
First of all, sin taxes on tobacco, alcohol, etc are meant to cover the costs of providing medical care to their users. That covers the social costs of those substances. Secondly, the parent accepted that tobacco companies do lie and deceive their customers, he just stated that they're not deceiving him, since he's an informed consumer and understands that tobacco consumption is a high-risk act
Re: (Score:2)
thank you for a response.
On sin taxes, a few random thoughts cross my mind. "Intend" is often tricky. For most of the last century, the relevant intent was the tobacco people, mediated through southern politicians. I think I could make a good argument that the sin taxes have yet to cover the social costs. Since the sin taxes are never supported by the tobacco companies, but are forced by the government under some sort of general welfare approach, I wonder how you manage to support the sin taxes. Can th
Re: (Score:2)
It's questionable whether someone knowingly inhaling a carcinogenic agent should call anyone "dimlow". It's also questionable whether supplying such a person the means to self-abuse is morally right. What isn't questionable is that having others suffer from second-hand smoke is quite thoroughly
Re: (Score:2)
"It's questionable whether someone knowingly inhaling a carcinogenic agent should call anyone "dimlow""
Consider your atmosphere and current city pollution levels.
Rethink your statement.
Backpedal faster than a politician.
Re: (Score:2)
Bad? It depends... (Score:2)
Yet they are a perfect example of the schizophrenic nature of our legislators:
Yet,
Re: (Score:2)
They ban smoking in office buildings that might be visited by the public
If something might be visited by the public, chances are that there's other workers. Second hand smoke can be just as bad to people, as well as computers [rinkworks.com]. Most non-smokers chose not to smoke because they prefer not having a nicotine addiction, having an awful smell, or eventually getting cancer because they can't find a smoke-free environment (and no, living off welfare doesn't count because that's stigmatized.) In case of children, I'm sure they prefer not being actively screwed over by their own parent
Re: (Score:2)
This is something I wonder about. I do consider tobacco companies an evil force in some sense. They're useful to governments because of taxes so governments certainly don't want to fight them. Let's see, tobacco isn't something that's probably harmful - it has been well proven scientifically that there's tobacco causes health problems. It is also known that it's not causing some minor problems but causes significant problems like cancer, with a statistically significant reduction in life extensiveness. Plus, it's known that tobacco is, because of nicotine, addictive. It seems like a major part of this is that smoking/tobacco use has been around for a while before modern medicine and before definitive proof of its ill effects. Imagine this - I invent a device that, when used, gives you huge, orgasmic physical pleasure. That would be addictive enough psychologically. Now imagine this device also has slight physically addictive effects and, most importantly, gives you an above-normal dose of gamma radiation, high enough so that a significant amount of device users would eventually succumb to cancer or radiation sickness caused by it. Would I really be allowed to market and sell the device? I'm pretty sure I wouldn't, certainly not unless the government would stand to gain very serious revenue from taxes on that, and even then I'm doubtful.
Sure you would be able to. Its called 'high glucose corn syrup'. You can find it in MANY different food products and it causes serious health issues like unhealthy weight gain (they are 'empty' calories). [princeton.edu] It also causes Diabetes, a life changing and possible fatal health condition. [sciencedaily.com] Its even been linked to possible liver scarring. [sciencedaily.com] And the best part about this? Its not heavily taxed like cigarettes.
Takes one to know one. (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, there are blatant scams advertised and you write an article about a product emphasizing its need.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a needless article that is preaching to the choir.
uhmmm, ya maybe, but me, i think of it as more of a contrapuntal invention [wikipedia.org] inviting the choir to join in, but then, that's how i see most /. articles.
Advertisers are deceptive assholes, film at 11 (Score:4, Insightful)
Right up there with those assholes at Domain Registry of America. [2mhostblog.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It looks like an invoice. If you're a small business owner that doesn't know any better it can get in a stack of bills and you see the $37.50 and something about your domain name and cut a check. That is what they are hoping for. I bet I get 10 - 15 a month from them.
Re: (Score:2)
I must admit that I do feel a little bit of satisfaction knowing that they're paying to send several pieces of snail mail across the Atlantic to me every year.
The sad thing about that is that they're probably making enough money to be able to send out that many letters in international mail each year. I get about 3 or 4 of those things in the mail each year, each for a separate domain, and so do a couple of acquaintances of mine. If for every 10 letters they send, one sucker gets fooled, that still makes it profitable.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Their letters come with prepaid reply envelopes. I always take some time to inform them of the other great opportunities I receive along in the mail.
This Was More Fun (Score:2)
Dirty Stacey Needs Registry Cleaner 5.4
http://maximumhoyt.blogspot.com/2010/04/dirty-stacey-needs-registry-cleaner-54.html [blogspot.com]
.Net installation audacious? (Score:2)
What a waste (Score:2, Funny)
The one time I actually decide to RTFA, and it's this? What a waste. It probably would have been more amusing if he'd dissected some of the spam e-mails waiting in his inbox.
Buy a new and modish watch today, and become recognizable tomorrow. If you are looking for fancy and cheap jewelry, you just found it.
a click away
That's just a sample of the excitement waiting in mine!
Why pay? (Score:3, Insightful)
Should this article be on
Re: (Score:2)
That's fine, as long as you don't use your PC for any commercial purposes at all. All the free antivirus software specifically says it's for non-commercial use only, leaving small business, and the like, in limbo.
Re: (Score:2)
clamwin [clamwin.com] is GPL which, of course, can be used in a commercial setting.
I have to apologize on behalf of the industry (Score:2)
I'm sorry. I'm honestly sorry. Trust me, if we (the techs) could fire the markedroids, they'd be going out the next cannon. And as far as we can overload said cannon without endangering human life (markedroids are NOT human).
The whole scaremongering bothers us the most. Trust me on that one. Because when we, the ones who do actually know when something really is bloody dangerous, cry bloody murder over a security threat, nobody listens anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the Navy would let you arrange a demonstration with USS Wisconsin's 16" main battery.
Re: (Score:2)
And given the amount of grease in the 'droids, that should oil their cannons pretty well too. Win-win!
Protection (Score:2)
guy's himself a fraud (Score:2)
McAfee browser toolbar intrusive and wasteful (Score:2)
It doesn't affect Chrome. Ironically
this is worthy of a mass email (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Malware on Linux? That's unpossible!
http://forums.unrealircd.com/viewtopic.php?t=6562
Re:Obligatory. (Score:4, Informative)
A shame you posted as AC - I would have modded you up.
Yes, of course malware will run on Linux. And, you do point out that the malware was installed from a subverted "trusted source".
You also remind me that I've been stupid sometimes. I've been lazy, and failed to double check the md5 checksums of tarballs on occasion. With that Unreal story in mind, maybe I'll be less lazy in the future. Thanks for the reminder, Mr. Coward.
Re:Obligatory. (Score:5, Informative)
A shame you posted as AC - I would have modded you up.
Yes, of course malware will run on Linux. And, you do point out that the malware was installed from a subverted "trusted source".
You also remind me that I've been stupid sometimes. I've been lazy, and failed to double check the md5 checksums of tarballs on occasion. With that Unreal story in mind, maybe I'll be less lazy in the future. Thanks for the reminder, Mr. Coward.
As a Linux user myself, I forget about how possible it is too. Would explain the new (that I've noticed) function in Ubuntu 10.04 that marks any program downloaded from a non-trusted as Non-Executable (you can make it executable by right-clicking it and checking the Executable box under Property-Permissions) to prevent you from blindly installing possible malware. Reminds me of Android's way of programs, preventing you from installing anything randomly unless you at least somewhat understand it might be bad to just install anything.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unless you've been living under a rock for the last 10 years, you'll know that while malware in Windows can spread when the user inadvertently executes something (which Linux does protect you against), it also frequently spreads by tricking the user into thinking they want to execute it (which Linux can't protect against) or taking advantages of security holes (which Linux can't protect against).
It only pains me to see you've been modded +5.
Re: (Score:2)
it also frequently spreads by tricking the user into thinking they want to execute it (which Linux can't protect against)
Thats why I wrote that 'preventing you from installing anything randomly unless you at least somewhat understand it might be bad to just install anything'. Its a warning to basic users that this isn't a trusted program from the safer channels and your taking your own risks installing it. If the user is tricked into installing it anyways even after having to go around such a warning then it's their fault and there isn't much you could do. Not everything you download from the internet isn't going to be good f
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you've been living under a rock for the last 10 years, you'll know that both Windows and Linux protect against inadvertent execution - they use different methods, but that doesn't mean Windows doesn't have protection, and it doesn't mean Linux is foolproof.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on how sophisticated the malware is, really. And, it also depends on how your Wine bottles are set up. Installing malware to it's own bottle would allow it almost no resources to work with. Installing to your "main" default bottle would provide a lot of resources, with their potential exploits. Of course, even with a rather sophisticated malware, and a lot of resources in the Wine bottle to which it was installed, you can just kill the process at any time. I've not yet seen the malware that can
Also obligatory: (Score:2, Insightful)
Kill yourself.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
OK, it's bad enough when people write or say virii, but vira? Really?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not defending the ugly "your computer may actually be on fire Right NOW!" type of add, but doesn't an expired AV subscription warrant some sort of urgency being conveyed
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the article lacked a good punchline. I was underwhelmed and thinking, "I'll never get these 5 minutes back."
Re: (Score:2)
I concur with that general feeling. It was a huge waste of time. The article is worthless for the most part.
There was one point he started to touch on but didn't go into well enough, in my opinion. It's one of my favorite speaking points:
Pity and forgive the poor user. There are just some things that will never come naturally to them. They tend to buy into advertising as fact rather than spin or fiction. I try my best to educate users without their feeling as though I am shoving unwanted information d
Re: (Score:2)
It's not necessarily a situation to be concerned about. I've used Windows 2000 and Vista as my desktop for over 10 years, and have used antivirus only occasionally (to test it out for other people predominantly (MSE completely hosed my system last time I installed it). I've had _one_ successful virus - still not sure how it got there, back in the win2k days. I cleaned it out in a couple of hours.
As long as you're not stupid about running stuff, there aren't too many remote exploits to worry about, and mo
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You aren't the person AV expiration warnings are targets at then. You successfully ran a network connected Windows machine for years and only got one virus, so by definition you aren't the targeted audience.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think there is much money in that. If I was a virus writer I would make it send me useful information like credit card numbers, PayPal accounts and have it network together with other compromised computers to form some kind of bot network. I hope the guys making "format C:" viruses don't get any ideas.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't seem so to me - at least with a tech-savvy user. It's been 12 years since my last infection (Since then, none of the AVs I've used have even picked up anything). And no suspicious behavior.
You don't use the internet like an idiot, and you stay safe.
Expired AVs do popups, not emails (Score:3, Interesting)
The flurry of popup windows you get when an AV expires, along with all the dire warnings from Windows Security Center, won't leave you in any doubt about the status of your antivirus. No email required.
The bigger the vendor, the more "Insert credit card now!" message you'll get.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I don't get it ... he's complaining that an e-mail shouts "Danger Will Robbins!" because his AV subscription has expired? On Windows that's a situation to be concerned about.
He's complaining that an email from the vendor of a AV product he tried three years ago is shouting assertions as to the status of his AV protection. This is just a little different from an AV vendor reminding you to renew your subscription - it's probably a safe bet that he's moved on to a different AV product.
...doesn't an expired AV subscription warrant some sort of urgency being conveyed in the message?
The day/week/month after the subscription expired? Maybe. But three years later? That's getting disturbingly close to those sketchy telemarketers who call up to warn you that the warranty on your au
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ahem, it's "Danger, WIll Robinson! [wikipedia.org]"
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get it ... he's complaining that an e-mail shouts "Danger Will Robbins!" because his AV subscription has expired? On Windows that's a situation to be concerned about. Of course, if he's switched security products or OS's then he doesn't care, but the vendor doesn't know that and he should out-out/unsubscribe to their notices.
The vendor doesn’t know?
Really?
How then does the vendor know that the software is still installed on his computer? It is what it says in the e-mail.
The only proper way to notify your user is through the software itself. At least in cases like this.
I'm not defending the ugly "your computer may actually be on fire Right NOW!" type of add, but doesn't an expired AV subscription warrant some sort of urgency being conveyed in the message?
Still, I’d bet anything you please that McAffee didn’t bother to check whether he really had their software installed. They could’ve; all it would take is the last update notify McAffee to send an upgrade offer.
But that takes more time and
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
My guess is that you didn't RTFA
The author downloaded a free version of McAfee 3 years ago as a test/review of their product
He wasn't a paying customer
McAfee recently spammed him with the ad in question
Carefully crafted fear as a marketing tool is the issue at hand here
Maybe next time you should RTFA before posting .. then your post wouldn't sound stupid ..
No flame intended, just a suggestion
Re:It's not "insightful" (Score:4, Informative)
It's the principle of the thing. You go to a doctor, and you expect to see him wash his hands and/or put on gloves before examining you. Never mind that it's unnecessary most of the time; it should be a habit for him, simply because sometimes it matters, and when it matters it matters a lot.
Seeing a security company take a cavalier attitude with your information - even when that information probably isn't terribly sensitive and probably won't get intercepted anyway doesn't inspire confidence in their dedication to protecting your information in the scenarios where it does matter.
Re: (Score:2)
In theory, the worst that can happen is that the unpriv'd account will get raped, but the Win7 install will be OK.
IMO, you should still install an anti-virus for the belt-and-suspenders stuff, since you can still have compromised personal information if an unpriv'd account is owned. MS Security Essentials isn't bad and doesn't bug you much.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My previous post didn't take into account privilege-escalation attacks, of which there may be some undiscovered/unreported ones.
It's best to have multiple layers of defense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, but Win7 suffers from the same problem all Windows versions since 2k suffered: Badly written software that doesn't give a rat's ass about user privileges, and whose advice when you're facing a problem due to (unnecessarily) elevated privilege expectations is to "run our software with admin privileges".
If you happen to install software in the "program files" directory, which is the default location for programs since Windows was born, you are already heading for desaster. Why? Because since Vista, this t
Re: (Score:2)
The whole point is to eliminate privilege escalation entirely. Yes, it
Re: (Score:2)
I'm writing this post from a non-privileged user account, and I type the admin password 50 times a day for all sorts of installations, configuration settings, etc.
My question is: how (un?)safe is a Windows 7 box running under a non-privileged account?
Reasonably safe, as long as you're typing that admin password to temporarily log in to the admin user, then logging out and logging back in as ordinary user. Don't let any user use UAC, even yourself; that way you can be sure that Malware never tricks you into unlocking UAC (or waiting until you unlock UAC to do its dirty deeds).
Re: (Score:2)
You do not play many games on your Windows PC, I can see that...
Re: (Score:2)
I'll probably get laughed at for this, but I thought I'd use this opportunity to get some advice, on something that I have been wondering about lately
...has anyone seen my red stapler?
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a laptop, the internet is not necessarily ubiquitous. And if your battery life is so bad that you absolutely must be tethered to an outlet, you should think about getting a new one.
Re: (Score:2)
So you're trying to tell me that McAfee has their marketing department send out emails, but doesn't have them make decision about branding?
Tell me, just why do you think McAfee chose red as their "goddamned branding color"?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm convinced Kdawson killed Timothy in his sleep and has been posting as him for quite some time.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows is fixed, all right. When you get the users fixed so they don't click on anything promising them dancing bunnies, I'll go out of business.
I'm 35 now. I'm pretty sure I can stay in anti malware 'til I retire...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not having AV is just like having unprotected sex, she could be infecting other people all the time.
Keeping your comp clean is more like being a responsible adult in this community, get her a free AV, they are out there. ClamAV, AVG, etc.