![]() ![]() |
Sep 22 2008, 01:47 PM
Post
#1
|
|
![]() Forum Deity ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Rogue Reporters Posts: 5,830 Joined: 7-July 08 From: West Aussie Member No.: 2,796 |
QUOTE According to new data from McAfee, a user searching for a variety of Brad Pitt-themed items (wallpapers, screensavers, photos, etc.) has, on average, an 18 percent chance of encountering malware in one form or another. Such malware is often served up by a "fake" celebrity website whose primary purpose is to shove Trojans and worms into the desktops of the unwary. These websites differ from standard malware landing pads, insomuch as they may make an effort to appear as a legitimate source of news. Ars Technica Article -------------------- |
|
|
|
Sep 22 2008, 07:26 PM
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Advanced Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Experts Posts: 152 Joined: 30-May 08 Member No.: 2,522 |
And "the flip side of the coin."
QUOTE This sort of hyperbole about the dangers of cyberspace may fill column centimetres and attract casual readers, but it doesnt actually help anyone. For a start, it simply isnt true. If you go online and search for "Pitt", you do NOT have a one-in-five chance of getting infected, and suggesting that you do is just spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt). sophos.com/blogs -------------------- |
|
|
|
Sep 23 2008, 03:22 AM
Post
#3
|
|
![]() Forum Deity ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Rogue Reporters Posts: 5,830 Joined: 7-July 08 From: West Aussie Member No.: 2,796 |
This sort of hyperbole about the dangers of cyberspace may fill column centimetres and attract casual readers, but it doesnt actually help anyone. For a start, it simply isnt true. If you go online and search for "Pitt", you do NOT have a one-in-five chance of getting infected, and suggesting that you do is just spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt). And then the author of the Sophos article goes on to say - QUOTE Another important flaw with this story is that it doesn’t bother to explain how you can search safely. Let’s say you really do want to search for “Pitt”. (Sydney alone, for rather obvious historical reasons, has numerous Streets, Roads, Lanes, a Town and even a Water which carry this name.) How do you avoid the alleged 20% “infection chance”? The answer is that with the right precautions, and the right sensibilities, you can search in almost complete safety for almost anything you want. Here’s how to do it: 2. Use a web filter. Products such as the Sophos Web Appliance have two chances to protect you: if you click on a link - no matter that it is legitimate or uncontroversial - which is already known to have been hacked, the connection will be blocked outright. And if you do visit a newly-infected page containing risky content, it will be analysed and blocked on the way back. I really don't care about what McCafee or Sophos have to say and only posting as a matter of interest. Want to be really safe when browsing then run your browser through Sandboxie. -------------------- |
|
|
|
Sep 23 2008, 06:37 AM
Post
#4
|
|
![]() Advanced Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Experts Posts: 152 Joined: 30-May 08 Member No.: 2,522 |
I really don't care about what McCafee or Sophos have to say and only posting as a matter of interest. I'm with you on that! Want to be really safe when browsing then run your browser through Sandboxie. Yep! I do. -------------------- |
|
|
|
Sep 23 2008, 02:12 PM
Post
#5
|
|
![]() Forum Deity ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Rogue Reporters Posts: 5,830 Joined: 7-July 08 From: West Aussie Member No.: 2,796 |
-------------------- |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 9th February 2010 - 03:17 PM () |