Simon points to a Register article by Tim Mullen, blaming “clueless users” for their own PC security problems. Tim writes:
We are calling for users to take a little time and to learn minimal skills before attaching their systems to the Internet.
A question that people seem to have stopped asking is, “Why can openning an email trash my PC?” The answer is that Microsoft thought that executing arbitrary code emailed from strangers was a good idea. This attitude pervades their entire OS. It means Windows users have to understand their OS in order to protect themselves from it, even though not all of them are capable of that level of understanding.
Users should be able to mouse and click and tap without having to think about computer security. The idea that waving my hand and wiggling my fingers can ruin a few thousand dollars worth of PC is ridiculous.
I’m saying that it should be safe for users to be clueless.
It works just fine on the Mac.
Comments
Microsoft are responsible for making the problem *worse* - but they aren't responsible for the problem. Also, with Macs being less common than Windows boxes, there are bound to be less threats. So, there are two reasons why Macs are safer than Windows boxes.
But the threat isn't zero, and the point that I think the article was making is that it *never* *can* *be*. The Internet is an uncontrolled and occasionally hostile place. Technitions cannot, simply *cannot* make your system absolutely safe[1]. They can provide tools to help you make your own system safer, but the ever changing nature of the threat means that even these tools have limits, so the onus must be on the user to behave resposibly also.
So, don't open attachments that you aren't expecting without checking that they were really and deliberatly sent by the person you think sent them. And *never* open attachments from anyone you don't know, and *never* open executable attachments. If my step-mother had followed these rules, which I *had* explained to her, it would have saved me 9 hours of my life a couple of weeks ago. :-(
[1] Which doesn't excuse Microsoft not even having a good go.
This has absolutely nothing to do with computer-y stuff (alright, maybe it does), but I am loving the fab new blog look. Very shiny! </:o)
Awww, shucks Kate. That's high praise, coming from you.
Hi Simon,
I hope you didn't LART your step-mother. :)
You have a good point about the Internet never actually being safe, but as things stand, the bulk of the security problem lies with one company. If that company's board chose to, they could reduce the risk of malicious attacks on everyday users significantly.
I am not saying that it is an easy problem for Microsoft to solve. The solution may involve spending a decent portion of their fabulous cash reserves.
a
No, Alan, I didn't LART[1] her. Honest. ;-)
But I can't promise what'll happen if she breaks it again...
[1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/L/LART.html
That URL reminds me: I need to add '~' to the list of allowed characters for URLs.