I disagree
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Aug 11, 2009 5:19 PM EDT |
We do not need more laws. |
| techiem2 Aug 11, 2009 5:41 PM EDT |
Amen to that TA. The suggestion for required courses in school is good of course, I personally think these days everyone should have SOME basic education about computer use and security. However not necessarily to the extent he seems to desire. As for the next item.. Quoting: That, and require ISP's to take more responsibility for the system security of their customers, by setting up their routers to automatically detect suspicious activity, such as botnet-instigated spam and Denial of Service attacks. That, and requiring all customers to maintain at least basic security. That just scares me. What defines suspicious activity? My ISP already (to my great annoyance) blocks outgoing port 25 (SMTP) traffic. Of course they would say this is to cut down on spam, but we all know that it also stops many people from using other email services (fortunately my domain provider and gmail both run their smtp servers on alternate ports to get around ISPs that do this). So what are they going to look for? IRC connections? I'm on 3 networks 24/7. Ok, maybe their routers could watch for ping floods. But what defines a flood? And how would they know it's malicious and not someone validly testing their own server? Blocking access to ports that certain viruses/spyware/etc. often use? Who's to say those same ports aren't being used legitimately? After all there's only so many ports. And then we come down to "requiring all customers to maintain at least basic security." How in the world are they gonna do that? How can they tell if you are secure without monitoring your systems? We should all go back to Windows so we can run some ISP's monitoring software to "keep us safe"? No Thanks. The ONLY thing I can really see an ISP doing validly that most likely wouldn't disrupt any legitimate traffic would be for them to use a service such as OpenDNS with the default settings (block known spyware/etc. sites) by default. Anything more than that and they would likely be hurting their customers. The more they filter and block, the more they end up hurting their customers. I like the security of my LAN in my own hands. My router running my configured content filtering and using OpenDNS with a few modified settings to help keep everyone safe. Besides, no matter what actions you take, short of fully filtering ALL content and ALL email, there will always be a way for someone to get themselves infected with something (at least there is if they are running Windows as an admin - and probably even if they aren't running as admin). Ok, enough of my ranting for now. It just amazes me at how clueless some people can be when they recommend such things. The issue is a whole lot more complex than they seem to realize. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 11, 2009 5:57 PM EDT |
techiem: My ISP has that solved, actually. Customers can log into the ISP website and set the level of security they want. It ranges from setting zero (everything open and unchecked. I have this set on my account) to five (extreme paranoia). By default users are set at level three (port 25 and a few Windows RCP ports blocked, moderate scanning by the DPI and firewalls for known malware). If you want level zero or five then you actually have to phone them, so they can be sure that you know what you're doing. Setting zero basically opens you up to all the malware and floods in the world (I run my own firewall) while setting five is so restricted as to be unworkable for most users (but great for secured VPNs and stuff). Levels 1-4 can be set directly on the website. |
| techiem2 Aug 11, 2009 6:05 PM EDT |
See, now that actually makes sense.
Give the default users some minimal basic protection and let them jack it up if they want, and let the pros call and say "leave my packets alone" (which of course is what I would do). :P Of course, there's also the fact that their port25, port80, etc. filtering are only for "home" accounts. I believe they leave business accounts alone. I'd gladly upgrade to a business account if I could afford to cover the difference in cost for the parents...but I doubt they would mix home tv and business inet, and my $$ is a bit tight right now.... I still think the port25 block by default is stupid though considering how many people these days have multiple email accounts and telecommute and such. |
| jdixon Aug 11, 2009 7:06 PM EDT |
> We do not need more laws. What's this? A libertarian viewpoint from Tracyanne? Don't let Caitlyn know. :) > How in the world are they gonna do that? Don't accept customers who run Windows? > I still think the port25 block by default is stupid though... Ain't it the truth. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!