«

From Graham Cluley's blog

Ninety percent of corporate PCs are a security risk because they are not
fully patched, or do not have basic security such as anti-virus software
and firewalls properly installed.

That's the rather staggering revelation made by the results from
Sophos's free Endpoint Assessment Test*, which has scanned Windows
computers on thousands of different business networks over the last
year.

See:
http://www.sophos.com/blogs/gc/g/200...asic-security/

On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 08:45:44 +0100, "~BD~" <>
wrote:

>From Graham Cluley's blog
>
>Ninety percent of corporate PCs are a security risk because they are not
>fully patched, or do not have basic security such as anti-virus software
>and firewalls properly installed.
>
>That's the rather staggering revelation made by the results from
>Sophos's free Endpoint Assessment Test*, which has scanned Windows
>computers on thousands of different business networks over the last
>year.
>
>See:
>http://www.sophos.com/blogs/gc/g/200...asic-security/
>

A very "surprising" message coming from a security vendor, isn't it?

Gee, referring to anti-virus and firewalls on clients as "basic
security" says it all....

In article <h0l3vg$pce$>,
says...
> Ninety percent of corporate PCs are a security risk because they are not
> fully patched, or do not have basic security such as anti-virus software
> and firewalls properly installed.
>

And that would be mostly inflammatory and designed for the masses to
scare them.

Not all patches are necessary in all environments - so the statement is
incorrect to start with.

I have yet to find a Corporate environment without AV software running
and fetching updates - so, again, the security risk because of the
stated reasons is more FUD designed to just scare the masses of people
ignorant about security.

Where I've seen security fail is in what access is permitted, something
that neither patches or AV software can prevent.

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
(remove 999 for proper email address)

All comments appreciated. Thank you.

Perhaps you'd like to provide your thoughts on how many privately owned
(non-work) computers you think may be similarly compromised - without
the knowledge of the user.
--
Dave

~BD~ wrote:
> All comments appreciated. Thank you.
>
> Perhaps you'd like to provide your thoughts on how many privately owned
> (non-work) computers you think may be similarly compromised - without
> the knowledge of the user.

At least 10 out of 10 computers with Microsoft Windows installed.

In article <h1fec9$1qi$>, ~BD~@nomail.afraid.com says...
>
> All comments appreciated. Thank you.
>
> Perhaps you'd like to provide your thoughts on how many privately owned
> (non-work) computers you think may be similarly compromised - without
> the knowledge of the user.

Of the 2000+ systems that I know of, none are compromised, of the
hundreds of home systems that I know of, about 10% get compromised from
time to time with the newest threats... All windows based machines.

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
(remove 999 for proper email address)

In alt.computer.security, ~BD~ cross-posted:

> All comments appreciated. Thank you.
>
> Perhaps you'd like to provide your thoughts on how many privately
> owned (non-work) computers you think may be similarly compromised -
> without the knowledge of the user.

There was a piece on my local TV news a couple of months ago. The anchor
person started with "91% of personal computers are infected with some
sort of viruses and spyware...", then went on to give a few generic
details[1], all the while showing monitor closeups of people browsing
with Internet Explorer.

Duh!

[1. which weren't really all that useful, consisting mostly of "pay for
current anti-virus software" and "take your computer to the geek store."

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Windows

Hmmm! Have you any evidence to support your theory? <grin>

--
Dave

"Kelb tal-Fenek" <> wrote in message
news:h1feu0$a6c$...
> ~BD~ wrote:
>> All comments appreciated. Thank you.
>>
>> Perhaps you'd like to provide your thoughts on how many privately
>> owned
>> (non-work) computers you think may be similarly compromised - without
>> the knowledge of the user.
>
> At least 10 out of 10 computers with Microsoft Windows installed.
>

"Leythos" <> wrote in message
news: om...
> In article <h1fec9$1qi$>, ~BD~@nomail.afraid.com says...
>>
>> All comments appreciated. Thank you.
>>
>> Perhaps you'd like to provide your thoughts on how many privately
>> owned
>> (non-work) computers you think may be similarly compromised - without
>> the knowledge of the user.
>
> Of the 2000+ systems that I know of, none are compromised, of the
> hundreds of home systems that I know of, about 10% get compromised
> from
> time to time with the newest threats... All windows based machines.
>
> --
> You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
> voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to
> that.
> Trust yourself.
> (remove 999 for proper email address)

I'm a little confused by your use of the word 'system', Leythos.
Regardless, you seem to suggest that perhaps 1 in 10 of 'home' use
computers become 'infected'.

Worldwide, I feel that you are underestimating the problem.

--
Dave

"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <> wrote in message
news:h1fv2t$ctb$...
> In alt.computer.security, ~BD~ cross-posted:
>
>> All comments appreciated. Thank you.
>>
>> Perhaps you'd like to provide your thoughts on how many privately
>> owned (non-work) computers you think may be similarly compromised -
>> without the knowledge of the user.
>
> There was a piece on my local TV news a couple of months ago. The
> anchor
> person started with "91% of personal computers are infected with some
> sort of viruses and spyware...", then went on to give a few generic
> details[1], all the while showing monitor closeups of people browsing
> with Internet Explorer.
>
> Duh!
>
> [1. which weren't really all that useful, consisting mostly of "pay
> for
> current anti-virus software" and "take your computer to the geek
> store."
>
> --
> -bts
> -Friends don't let friends drive Windows

Thanks for replying BTS.

I know you are not fond of Windows - but there are *lots* of users; I
suspect that without it, though, many folk would never have got to grips
with 'computing' at all! It is hardly the fault of the average user that
the product had/has inherent flaws.

My guess is that only 1 in 10 users has any clue about all the bad
things which can happen once one connects to the Internet - especially
with a broadband connection!

--
Dave