Between three to five per cent of corporate systems are infected by bots, according to a study by security firm Damballa. The finding comes from Damballa itself and is being used to promote the need for its line of security appliances, designed to block communications between infected hosts and zombie-control servers, as an …
Our survey says:
Where's yer data?
Oh there isn't any - what a surprise, so it's basically just a press release copied down and published
Poor article - how does this new technology work? (sounds like pretty standard IDS with a bit of 'Ironport' thrown in to me) what makes them so ace compared to ther others? Whats their average detection time? How do they know when new malware is released so they can time it?
It might well be great stuff but in a recent test we discovered 90% of press releases were full of shit. In tests 70% of companies who wouldn't publish their test results were exagerating wildly and 65% of all statistics are made up on the spot
Funny that.. a security company selling security products comes up with some scaremongering research based on figures that it has collected itself, which COINCIDENTALLY can be fixed by buying said products.
One in twenty corporate PCs? Rubbish.
To be fair, their figures on detection rates seem to be bang on.
"The study may point to shortcomings in conventional anti-virus software"
It more likely points to short comings in 5% of conventional IT departments. Short comings that shoving yet another chunk of junk into the network - to lie neglected and unpatched, for years to come, no doubt - will not address.
I grow tired to companies whose sales pitch consists of 'buy our one-stop solution, and you can continue to employ lazy, talentless liars.' There are good people, in IT, who are losing their jobs rght now, because of lazy talentless liars. It's hard work, being any good at this crap. That's why the wages are quite good.
in my experience
thats probably innacurate judging by the stupidity of our customers, im considering electro shock delieverd via mouse and keyboard.
"according to a study by security firm Damballa."
What was that Mandy Rice-Davies quote, again?
Must admit, the whole article seems to be a thinly-veiled bit of advertising to me.
Also, the company I work for has about 30,000 PCs, laptops, tablets, etc. I've not heard of any problems with infected machines, so in order for the numbers to work some businesses must be FULL of infected PCs... Mind you, some probably are!
@EnricoSuarve - Those stats are spot on. Interestingly only 126% of stats are exaggerated!
Could be accurate enough.
I recently downloaded a selection of month old Malware from Usenet "48 to 70k .exe files listed as movies music etc."
I checked the files using several popular AV programs and only one detected anything amongst them. Kasperski detected 4 out of 5 of them as various downloader’s and Trojans.
I submitted the 4 samples to ESET which took another week to include them in their DB.
So although the motives of the release seem suspect, I would not be at all surprised to discover the findings where accurate enough.
Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't, Oh no it is, oh yes it isn't,
We from McDonalds advise:
Eat at MacDonalds!
I'm just glad to see a concise article that introduces sufficient cynicism to make it funny.
Another reason to ditch MS
Seems like more "doom and gloom"
I think it's good to report stories like this, but it would be much better if some positive was included.
The link to the PDF from Damballa leads to nothing more than a sales paper.
If so many computers are really infected, PLEASE publish a list of "best" methods of detection. Surely somebody markets software that can detect and remove these bots.
Has there ever been a public demonstration to show that a computer is really "infected" by a bot, and that the leading AS/AV software fails to find the bot? I have scoured the internet searching for such info, but can not find anything.
I believe corporations such as Damballa release this kind of "study" data for marketing purposes, and that in most cases it is fabricated. If they are really legitimate, then why not offer some specific help to people? If 1 in 20 "corporate" computers are infected, then how many "personal" computers are infected, and who is doing something to help get them cleaned up???
I apologize for sounding negative, but I find this very irritating. These "sky is falling" stories hit the news frequently, and it's always the same - "The world is in trouble", while making NO mention of any potential solution.
The Damballa "study" does not name any defense software it tested, nor does it state a method of infection. How do the infected machines become infected? Is it by visiting a malicious web site? Opening infected email? How exactly does the process work?
Given that almost all corporations have multiple software applications, and sometimes even hardware, in place as defense, I can only assume that if 1 in 20 of them become infected, then a much higher number of "home" computers must be infected.
It would be nice if somebody would publish a recommended course of action along with this type of article.
"It would be nice if somebody would publish a recommended course of action along with this type of article"
Insert Ubuntu live CD
Change theme to 'redmond'
Send emails to users notifying them of a upgrade!
- +Comment Anti-Facebook Ello: Here's why we're still in beta. SPAMGASM!
- Analysis Windows 10: One for the suits, right Microsoft? Or so one THOUGHT
- Vid+Pics Microsoft WINDOWS 10: Seven ATE Nine. Or Eight did really
- Xbox hackers snared US ARMY APACHE GUNSHIP ware - Feds
- George Clooney, WikiLeaks' lawyer wife hand out burner phones to wedding guests