The newly published Microsoft Security Intelligence Report (SIR) has said
that the Windows 7PC is more at risk of having malware than XP computers.
Microsoft said that in the last quarter of 2013, the Windows 7 computers it
scanned were more likely to be infected by malware than PCs running Windows
XP. An infection rate of 2.59% was found for Windows 7 PC compared to 2.42%
Windows Vista was also affected by malware. Microsoft has calculated the
infection rate for each version of Windows is calculated by comparing an
equal number of computers per version.
The company said that infection rates jumped drastically from Q3 to Q4 2013
mainly due to the Rotbrow family of malware which presented itself as a
Microsoft Security Intelligence Report said that Windows 7 can provide
better security than Windows XP if configured in a proper manner.
The infection rates measured in computers cleaned per thousand (CCM -- yes
M, the Latin for thousand) rose from 5.6 in Q3 to 17.8 in Q4 of last year on
the back of the Win32/Senfit click fraud bot.
The CCM rates for Vista and Windows 7 were higher than XP for the quarter.
The report shows an infection rate of 25.9 percent for Windows 7, 32.4
percent for Vista and 24.2 percent for XP.
Daughter got something from Facebook that attacks only Windows 7 OS's.
First thing it did was disable Malwarebytes and her AV. Then it pretended
to be her AV and told her that she needed to pay to remove the virus.
I wound up paying our local computer store to remove it. They said it is a
PITA to remove and there was nothing she could have done to prevent getting
it. She didn't use Facbook for a very long time after that though!
On 05/10/2014 09:30 AM, Mycroft Holmes wrote:
There IS intelligence there. It's just being misused.
Since "malware" is any software on your computer that is under someone
else's control and is intended (or used) for purposes contrary to what
the owner wants, M$ stuff is malware.
BTW, because of my experiences with BASIC on home computers, I tend to
read "M$" as "M-string" ('$' was used to indicate string variables).
So - what exactly has it ever detected (that wasn't a false positive) ?
AV detection of new malware has been pathetic for the past 5 or 6
years. Just this past week I've submitted about 1/2 dozen malware files
sent as email attachments to VirusTotal, and the detection rate has been
anywhere from 0/52 to 5/52. Some of these are PDF files (real pdf,
claiming to be .scr (I know the difference is subtle).
I've run the infected files at Anubis and have downloaded the secondary
payloads and submitted them to VT, and always get 0/52.
On Saturday, May 10, 2014 8:22:22 AM UTC-4, Sherlock.Homes wrote:
Ther'e a surprise. Those out to screw the world are focused on new
OS's that are widely used and increasing, instead of the decade old and
declining one. Makes sense just from volume. Then factor in that
since XP is a decade old, hackers have had that much time to find and
exploit and flaws, while with Win 7, there is probably much more to
look for and that hasn't been found/fixed.
On Sat, 10 May 2014 09:38:44 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
People would be best served by tending to their System Security
Status. Belarc Advisor is free, will audit your system, provide hot
links - pointing to ways to secure the system. People are just sloppy
about it. <http://belarc.com/free_download.html
XP was the most dangerous OS release on the masses. Out of the box all
ports were open.
Shields Up (port) testing can be done at:
(More than 94,405,250 shields tested!)
I do internal penetration testing for PCI (credit card
compliance). Yes, with the customer's written permission!
You can not stealth a Windows computer. Sorry. No with
any software firewall. I will find you. And I will charge
you hours writing up reports about all your ports I find
open and why.
Moral of the story: you can only protect Windows with
an external *hardware* firewall.
This doesn't mean you shouldn't turn off all the
Windows crap you can in an attempt to harden it.
1) turn off file and print sharing
IE (in add remove programs, Windows stuff)
Acrobat Reader (Foxit Reader works well)
3) run a decent Anti Virus (I like Kaspersky. Bit Defender
does well too in tests.)
4) use Chrome, Firefox, and/or Thunderbird
And, I will still find you. But the bad guys will
have a much harder time infecting you. (I won't
find you behind an external hardware firewall that
has been stealthed, but I will find you if I am on
your internal network -- your permission and all.)
Or, use Fedora Linux, which is the most security hardened
Linux. I can stealth a Fedora Linux Box. Windows is
a security joke (all versions).
You can try Fedora Linux before you buy (it is free,
open source) with their Live CD (not DVD):
If you decide to stay with Windows, the Live CD is
a great tool to have around.
Here is a tip for Windows users. Junkware is not checked for
by your Anti Virus because it is legal. You can remove it with
my favorite utility: JRT (Junkware Removal Tool). I have
make dozens of excruciatingly slow Windows computers come
back to life with it:
the riddle wrapped in an enigma wrapped
The truth about Fedora (and the increasingly uncountable versions of
unix / linux out there these days) is that they are for geeks, not the
average computer user.
There is no version of those OS's that are shrink-wrapped and
one-button-installable by the average home or soho desktop or laptop
user that is in any way a coherent and ergonomic replacement for
windoze. And not just the OS, but all the personal and business apps
that go along with it.
For better or worse, it's about time you fools realized that.
And, it is getting easier every day.
By the way, I am a business and I am a Fedora shop.
There are lots of Business apps, just not from
Linux's only downfall is its lack of off the
shelf apps. But, you can almost always find
a work around, like I have.
But, you do have a point. Trying to get Windows
users off of Windows is like trying to get
an addict off of crack cocaine.
And when you life depends on it:
the riddle wrapped in an enigma wrapped
I haven't run win-95 since about July 2000.
But yea - I use Netscape Navigator for usenet. Something that
apparently mOron doesn't realize is that Usenet is about 15 years older
than the usenet client I use.
What a maroon you are - a proven fool.
Go look up how old usenet is, and then tell us why a "modern" usenet
client is any better than an old one.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.