Re: Compliance Is Wasted Money, Study Finds

[Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com>]

Surely being forced to install an anti-virus only brings in a monopoly? How
do I know that PCI Standards writers are getting a nice commission off me
installing the anti-virus? (I know they don't, I'm just hypothesizing).

You stated it yourself, an anti-virus may not do any difference, it is there
as per PCI standard.....so what is it's use? Why the heck do I have to
install something useless?

Lastly, that is where you are wrong, there is no "base starting point"
companies don't give a shit about proper security measures, they get
PCI-certified and all security ends there.
That is the freaken problem.

NB: I do use anti-virus software, what I specified above is not in any way
my opinion about anti-virus vendors, etc.







On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Shaqe Wan <sha8e () yahoo com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I don't actually beleive there is a "democratic society". No such thing
> exists. If it does? Then ask the organizations who made the compliance
> requirements drop them and make audits based on some other measure that you
> believe is more secure and has less flaws in it. Finally, regarding the AV
> issue that I wish I end here, is that "I don't believe that an AV shall make
> your box secure, but its a requirement to be done - Added by PCI"
>
> And yes I have noticed that FD is for such security measures discussion,
> but never thought of joining it and discussing with others until a couple of
> days ago when I saw this topic.
>
> Finally, the compliance can be taken of as a base starting point, and then
> moving further, like that it shall not be a waste of money !
>
> Regards,
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com>
> *To:* Shaqe Wan <sha8e () yahoo com>
> *Cc:* full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> *Sent:* Tue, April 27, 2010 9:59:59 AM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Full-disclosure] Compliance Is Wasted Money, Study Finds
>
> Perhaps you haven't noticed, this is Full-Disclosure, which at least, is
> used to discuss security measures.
> As such, it is only natural to argue with PCI's possible security flaws.
>
> Besides, in a democratic society (where CC do operate as well), you can't
> "force" someone to install an anti-virus just because _you_ think it is
> secure.
>
> The argument were compliance is wasted money still holds.
>
> Cheers.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Shaqe Wan <sha8e () yahoo com> wrote:
>
> > Hola,
> >
> > The problem is not weather they are educated against other standards or
> > policies or not, the problem is that without this compliance you can't work
> > with CC !!! Its something that is enforced on you !
> >
> > BTW: why don't people discuss what is the points missing in the PCI
> > Compliance better than this argue ?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > *From:* Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com>
> > *To:* Shaqe Wan <sha8e () yahoo com>
> > *Cc:* full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> > *Sent:* Mon, April 26, 2010 4:19:27 PM
> >
> > *Subject:* Re: [Full-disclosure] Compliance Is Wasted Money, Study Finds
> >
> > OK.
> >
> > "All those in favour of PCI raises their hands."
> >
> > Kidding aside, of course it is a must, since the said companies doesn't
> > have any notion of security before this happens.
> > However, how much is this actually helpful? Now let's be honest, how much
> > would it stop a potential attacker from getting into a system "protected" by
> > PCI?
> > Little, if at all.
> >
> > On the other hand, a company should adopt real and complete security
> > practices.
> >
> > Again, my point is, these companies shouldn't be "educated" or limit their
> > security to this standard. Because if they do (and I'm pretty sure they do)
> > would make this standard pretty much useless.
> >
> > Anyway, I won't get into this argument, since no one will give a sh*t
> > about it anyway.
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Shaqe Wan <sha8e () yahoo com> wrote:
> >
> > > Christian,
> > >
> > > Did you read my first post?
> > >
> > > ((( IMO, PCI is not that big security policy, but without it your not
> > > able to use the credit card companies gateway. I think its just the
> > > basics that any company dealing with CC must implement. Because it shall be
> > > nonsense to deal with CC, and not have an Anti-virus for example !! )))
> > >
> > > I am not stating that PCI is good in no way, but I am saying that its a
> > > MUST for companies dealing with CC. And in a windows environment, an AV is
> > > important.
> > >
> > > He probably thought that I am with the rules of PCI, or that I don't have
> > > any idea that the world is not just WINDOWS !!!
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > *From:* Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com>
> > > *To:* Shaqe Wan <sha8e () yahoo com>
> > > *Cc:* full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> > > *Sent:* Mon, April 26, 2010 3:54:20 PM
> > >
> > > *Subject:* Re: [Full-disclosure] Compliance Is Wasted Money, Study Finds
> > >
> > > Why exactly are you complying with Nick's statements? I would have
> > > thought you guys were arguing against said statements?
> > >
> > >
> > > By the way, requirement #6 is particularly funny; it sounds peculiarly
> > > redundant to me...
> > >
> > > Cheers.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 7:34 AM, Shaqe Wan <sha8e () yahoo com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >  Nick,
> > > >
> > > > Please if you don't know what the standards are, please read:
> > > >
> > > > https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/pci_dss.shtml
> > > >
> > > > See *Requirement #5*. Read that requirement carefully and its not bad
> > > > to read it twice though in case you don't figure it out from the first
> > > > glance !
> > > >
> > > > Also, I said that using an AV is some basic thing to do in any company
> > > > that wants to deal with CC, its a basic thing for even companies not dealing
> > > > with CC too !!! Or do you state that people must use a BOX with no AV
> > > > installed on it? If you believe in that fact? Then please request a change
> > > > in the PCI DSS requirements and make them force the usage of a non Windows
> > > > O.S, such as any *n?x system.
> > > >
> > > > Finally, the topic here is not about "default allow vs default deny" and
> > > > if I understand what that is or not! You can open a new discussion about
> > > > that, and I shall join there and discuss it further with you, in case you
> > > > need some clarification regarding it.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Shaqe
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- On *Sun, 4/25/10, Nick FitzGerald <nick () virus-l demon co uk>*wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > From: Nick FitzGerald <nick () virus-l demon co uk>
> > > > Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Compliance Is Wasted Money, Study Finds
> > > > To: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> > > > Date: Sunday, April 25, 2010, 1:57 PM
> > > >
> > > > Shaqe Wan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > <<snip>>
> > > > > Because it shall be nonsense to deal with CC, and not have an
> > > > Anti-virus for example !!
> > > >
> > > > Well, you see, _that_ is abject nonsense on its face.
> > > >
> > > > Do you have any understanding of one of the most basic of security
> > > > issues -- default allow vs. default deny?
> > > >
> > > > There are many more secure ways to run systems _without_ antivirus
> > > > software.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone authoritatively stating that antivirus software is a necessary
> > > > component of a "reasonably secure" system is a fool.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone authoritatively stating that antivirus software is a necessary
> > > > component of a "sufficiently secure" system is one (or more) of; a
> > > > fool, a person with an unusually low standard of system security, or a
> > > > shill for an antivirus producer.
> > > >
> > > > So _if_, as you and another recent poster strongly imply, the PCI
> > > > standards include a specific _requirement_ for antivirus software, then
> > > > the standards themselves are total nonsense...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Nick FitzGerald
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > > > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > > > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/