Security Incidents mailing list archives
Re: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility
From: Neil Dickey <neil () geol niu edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 13:59:10 -0500 (CDT)
Luc Pardon <lucp () skopos be> wrote:
I think we all agree that connecting an unpatched IIS machine to the open Internet is acting irresponsibly. Most AUP's already prohibit spamming, port scanning etc. (at least on paper). Why not include "infection through negligence" as a reason for suspension? Maybe with a reasonable grace period the first time.
While I might support this on first blush, there is the possibility of unintended consequence to be considered. Those of us who have developed a facility with computers easily forget how steep the learning curve is for the inexperienced, and how genuinely frightening the climb can be for some people. It used to require considerable competence to purchase a computer and get it running, but nowadays all one has to do is buy it and plug it in. This, of course, the Clueless Computer User ( CCU ), is right at the core of the problem. Not a few of them, literally, would freeze like a deer in the headlights on receipt of such a notification, complete with threatened sanctions. Further, if you suspend the network connection, you have just isolated them from the help and the patch packages they need to fix the difficulty. This is true regardless of the level of competence of the user, and really isn't such a good thing to do in my opinion. ( Personal experience here; details upon request. ) Exactly what the ISP should do in order to effect a solution instead of compounding the problem is not entirely clear to me. Perhaps a package of links to sources of help could be offered in the event of infection. Perhaps also virus scanners and firewalls, like ZoneAlarm, could be bundled with the connection package. A tutorial, run as part of the setup and required before the connection is enabled, could introduce neophytes to the dangers of the internet, and particularly those inherent in e-mail. If the infection is prevented, this is best of all. Just my $0.02. Best regards, Neil Dickey, Ph.D. Research Associate/Sysop Geology Department Northern Illinois University DeKalb, Illinois 60115 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service. For more information on this free incident handling, management and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
Current thread:
- Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Luc Pardon (Sep 27)
- Re: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Chip McClure (Sep 27)
- Re: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility geoff (Sep 27)
- Re: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility John Oliver (Sep 27)
- Re: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Rich Puhek (Sep 27)
- Re: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility terry white (Sep 27)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility John Campbell (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Adcock, Matt (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Tracy Martin (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Homer Wilson Smith (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Tracy Martin (Sep 27)
- Re: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Neil Dickey (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Michael B. Morell (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Dave Salovesh (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility UMusBKidN (Sep 27)
- Re: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility robertm (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Jason Robertson (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Mogull,Rich (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility ahoward (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Greg A. Woods (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Jay D. Dyson (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Greg A. Woods (Sep 27)
- RE: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Stephen Villano (Sep 27)
(Thread continues...)
- Re: Nimda et.al. versus ISP responsibility Chip McClure (Sep 27)