Re: [ILUG] Virus protection

From: Rick Moen (rick at domain linuxmafia.com)
Date: Fri 20 Sep 2002 - 03:06:02 IST


Quoting AJ McKee (aj.mckee at domain nmtbmedia.com):

> Agreed thinking is a good idea, but one cannot account for ones mother who
> never used a computer before. Or ones sisters. While I have developed a
> sense of "right and wrong" in relation to this subject, you cannot and
> should ever expect your users to do the same.

I have

:!ls -1 /home | wc -l

16

users. All of them seem to use the "thinking" method pretty successfully. ;->

That's cheating, I know, to use a competently constructed OS. But the
following guidelines suffice even on legacy proprietary Microsoft OSes:

1. Understand the distinction between executing a file and viewing it.
    (Note that the desktop-user notion of "opening" a file blurs this
    distinction, and should be Considered Harmful.)[1]

2. Understand that you'll be accountable for executables that you run,
    so you'd better make sure you know what you _are_ running, and
    compensate for or eschew software that "helps" you by running things
    on your behalf without consulting you. (E.g., MS-Word/MS-Excel
    autorun macros, autorun.inf files on CD-ROMs, three-pane view in
    MS-Outlook/MS-Outlook Express.) Note that MS-Windows's default of
    concealing its halfassed excuse for file-typing -- filename extensions --
    interferes with users who happen to be aware of this obligation, and
    they must override the default.

3. If you screw up and run something you shouldn't have, it's not someone
    else's fault; it's yours -- and you should tell yourself the old
    "Doctor, doctor! It _hurts_ when I do this!" joke, while restoring
    your backup.

Wait, you say users aren't willing to do any of that? I say, let Papa
Darwin teach them how the world works. Fire the first few who destroy
corporate data through extreme, unmitigated stupidity. You'll be
surprised how fast the rest will learn.

[1] Inherently hazy distinction between code and data duly acknowledged
without further comment: It's distinct enough for most pragmatic
purposes.

-- 
Cheers,              "By reading this sentence, you agree to be bound by the 
Rick Moen             terms of the Internet Protocol, version 4, or, at your 
rick at domain linuxmafia.com   option, any later version."  -- Seth David Schoen


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:18:58 GMT