(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

M m m . . . maybe using Puppy could be part of government legislation
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... llpox.html


I seem to remember some form of bios viral checking was a possibility that was never implemented.

We now have systems such as Splashtop that are immune
In fact Puppy could go into firmware (how it was originally designed)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splashtop

Just as MS has recently been forced to provide alternative browsers
(in Europe)
maybe we could also have an option
to remove malware magnet (Windows)
and install a secure operating system
Maybe someone can email Steve Bulmer with this security suggestion?

It's always bothered me that Internet SERVICE is not considered
the same as other SERVICES we all have - phone, electriciy,
gas, etc. when it comes to provider liability......

- If your electric company suddenly surged your house with 300 volts
and blew out all your TVs, appliances, etc - there would/should be
lawsuits to replace all your damaged goods. Not the users fault.

- If your gas company suddenly pressurized your lines with 3X
the pressure they were designed for and caused fires and
explosions, again they should be held liable. Not the users fault.

And on and on. Why then should ISPs be held innocent when thru
no fault of the user they get a virus thru the ISPs servers?
A user nowadays has no way of knowing which site might want to
plant something. It's not like a user is standing at the door to a
whorehouse and knowingly walks in. For all the user knows,
he's going into Disneyland.

I realize the huge can of privacy issues involved, yet I can't see
why SOMETHING can't be done in this regard. And just because
an ISPs scanners 'look' at something, doesn't mean they have
to SAVE what they look at.....THAT would be Big Brother wanting
that...and I am the LAST person wanting more of THEM.

Or, we could just change our terminology - start calling them
IVPs (Internet Virus Providers) instead of ISPs.

Why then should ISPs be held innocent when thru
no fault of the user they get a virus thru the ISPs servers

Not enough legislator geeks.
You are quite right my ISP caches sites
- so those should be checked

If smart enough to download through TOR or such like
then smart enough to deal with problems

Who is providing a rerouting sandbox service - check my file before downloading . . . That would be a money maker . . .

. . . we can just smile and say 'I use Linux'

Someone from Microsoft said that Viruses are a feature,
and I was shocked that they said that,
since others always say it I interpret it as a joke or a rumor.

Anyway, the EULA of Windows practically says it,
you have to agree to let Microsoft access or modify Windows
without your permission, even if the result is harmful,
you agree Microsoft is not responsible,
before you can use Windows.

"PC AIDS"
Viruses are updates.
Updates are slowdowns.
Antivirus is a scam since they know more about virus than Microsoft.
Has Microsoft ever sued or press charges on a Malware distributor?
The only good thing about Windows is when it dies, a Linux PC is born.

Has the mean ROI in a new (Windows) PC ever been above Zero?

It is a question of liability

Windows is used in the Health Service and Defense industries.
You require a fit OS in these and many other areas.

Most governments are STILL funding MS.

I will be voting green
http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/120280

Vote Puppy

out_fisherman wrote:And on and on. Why then should ISPs be held innocent when thru
no fault of the user they get a virus thru the ISPs servers?
A user nowadays has no way of knowing which site might want to
plant something. It's not like a user is standing at the door to a
whorehouse and knowingly walks in. For all the user knows,
he's going into Disneyland.

I realize the huge can of privacy issues involved, yet I can't see
why SOMETHING can't be done in this regard. And just because
an ISPs scanners 'look' at something, doesn't mean they have
to SAVE what they look at.....THAT would be Big Brother wanting
that...and I am the LAST person wanting more of THEM.

Or, we could just change our terminology - start calling them
IVPs (Internet Virus Providers) instead of ISPs.

A: How does an ISP determine the difference between a virus and legitimate data? If they have false positives, it would prevent you from downloading legit content. Also, what if you want to download a virus? For example, if you are learning network security and you want to study one?

B: It wouldn't work anyway. Just encrypt the virus. The ISP cannot simply block all encrypted content (at least not without me and a bunch of other people freaking out and going on into a bloody rampage, severely deteriorating the average person's piece of mind and making so called "terrorists" seem like teddy bears). Encrypted data is necessary for things like secure banking, secure corporate VPNs, etc. Not to mention for normal people to send email without worrying about anybody intercepting it.

C: It would slow things down. Currently, they don't examine most traffic, they just shove it down the line as fast as they possibly can. Processing the data slows down transfer unless you have processing that runs faster than the speed of transfer (which would be impressive). Furthermore, in order to detect malware they would have to buffer the content so they can examine it all first, which would also add latency.

D: It would increase prices, even for those who don't want/need it. They would have to spend a bunch of money on more hardware to be able to process the data, on educating their emplyees on how to use the new hardware and software, on lawyers to update their security policies and what not, on PR to sooth people's grouchiness and make them believe it's actually a good thing, etc. These price increases would be spread to everybody. Why should I pay more for my internet just because some other idiot doesn't know how to take care of his computer? The argument that the internet would work better would likely be canceled by my above argument regarding performance decrease.

No offense out_fisherman, but that's a good leftist solution: create a bureaucracy to manage the problem, instead of promoting the real solution... and even those of us who do promote the real solution must pay for the new bureaucracy / suffer from it

BTW we have filtered internet that is supposed to be top-of-the-line. But it is still pretty rubbish - false positives on gtkforums and on downloads of programming languages and all sorts of ridiculous things. And a steady trickle of spam emails still get through, including those containing windows viruses.

"that's a good leftist solution: create a bureaucracy to manage the problem"

out_fisherman didn't propose that, only that the primary responsibility for preventing viruses should be on ISPs. And it actually makes more sense to have it that way, since ISPs presumably have superior expertise, better facilities, and more rigorous procedures than the average end user.

I doubt ISP's have much better luck staying ahead of malware than anyone else. At least, they can't do so to the extent of being able to guarantee it, so that no clients would have to run virus checkers in Windows.

A better analogy is asking/requiring your doctor to ensure you never get sick. Good luck...

Hey guys, it ain't our problem! We're running Puppy.

out_fisherman didn't propose that, only that the primary responsibility for preventing viruses should be on ISPs.

Yes, I realise they didn't propose a centralised government bureacracy to deal with it, and ISPs probably could do it more efficiently than users. But if the primary responsibility was on ISPs, then they would have to do it, and like PG said, they would pass the cost on to us... but we don't need it because we run Puppy.

And even if we did need it, some of us would rather control it ourselves. If the filtered internet that we have here blocks something incorrectly I can request that the site be reviewed. The ISP then passes the request on to the useless US company that they've outsourced the filtering to. If they're fast I'll get a cryptic reply (via the ISP) in a week or so. The reply will usually say the site is classified correctly, so I'll write another email (an angry one this time), and hopefully the site will be unblocked in another week or so. But sometimes the nitwits just repeat that it is classified correctly

A better analogy is asking/requiring your doctor to ensure you never get sick. Good luck...

I heard a rumour that in some forms of traditional Chinese medicine
You paid a doctor to keep you well
Get sick and he paid you.

With Open Source - any problem we can invest in those fixing it.
Don't trust or like the fix - try someone else - code always available

Hey guys, it ain't our problem! We're running Puppy.

I know what you mean but . . .
sadly others ignorance is our problem
90% of traffic is spam (probably zombie powered)
We ain't doing it but we are paying for it.
When critical systems that we run on
go down, we pay the price.

How about we license computers?
- oh wait a minute - they are licensed - to MS
Gosh they must be laughing all the way to the bankers . . .

Maybe when penguins get into power (vote Puppy)
those unable to remove zomby software
will have their computers dongled and their
ISP's will have direct access and checks.
Yep - you can run Windows if you wish
but it will cost you premium rates
- after all we live in a free world . . .
. . . free to be ignorant?
The price of Ignorance too high?