Why your PC might be put in quarantine

ARE YOU COMPLETELY MAD?????!!!! To suggest getting the government involved in a person's private live via the computer plus possibly putting a user fee on said user! More goverment or corporate control on any individual's life is NOT needed . More control DOES NOT mean better results in any situation. Remembe ras with all freedoms there are responsibility but all who has these freedoms will not use it to benefit all.

We could be taxed to death and still there will rogue systems, or new systems people make themselves that the system does not recognize. there are countries where the government controls everything, yet there are still holes. The free solution is none other than education of the risks and common sense.

Talk about a loaded question. lol

Actually I think there's more then one question here, and that's half the problem.
1. Who should be held accountable for internet security? The user, OS supplier, ISP, or some sort of over view group either private or government run.
2. What level of power is needed by any such group to protect users from security problems?
3. What trade off is reasonable in regards to a users privacy and the safety of all internet users?

I'll start with number 3 first.
I'm a libertarian by nature, and even I understand that in many sitiuations the good of the many needs to take precedence over the privacy of the indvidual. For example if a cop hears what he thinks is a gun shot from my house he can enter. On the really off chance there might be gun fire in my home, I'm more then willing to give up my right to privacy if it might save a life.... especially if it happens to be mine.
Closer to the subject at hand, in regards to things like, say child pornography, a persons right to privacy can be nullified if there is reasonably suspicion they're engaged in such behaviour. Let me add as it should be!
Many people see internet use as private when they do it in thier home. But it's not. By the same logic obscene phone calls would be private too, and they're not. So the ralling cry for freedom and privacy isn't really what's important, it's how much do we have to lose to make the internet safe?

Now on to question 1.
The major responsiblity is always in the hands of the end user, period. Not only using tools to prevent security problems, but quite frankly, by not being stupid. Vista's UAC was more a failure because it became a nag screen the majority of users just click yes to to get rid of. Windows 7 doesn't improve the situation any. In stead of trying to corral inept users it to safety "areas" people need to be taught good computing habits. No matter what you do a true idiot will find a way to screw it up. Even more so if some one is helping, say a hacker, con-man, or what have you. Of course there are improvments that can be made by others, like having a web browser run in a "sand box" mode so the rest of the system is protected. But any good hacker will find a way around anything you do eventually. As bizzare as the notion is, having people prove they have basic skills just like we do with driving a car might be needed some day. Sad really.

Lastly 2.
I'm sorry, but if some one is dumb enough to allow their computer to be hijacked into a "bot net" there has to be some consequence. Personally I think letting a ISP or government group scan your PC is a bit of over kill. As well I don't think it's necessary. Instead some sort of non-profit group watching net traffic with the aim of identifying things like "bot nets" then passing the information on to the ISPs. At that point the ISP shuts down all traffic to and from the users IP. To get back on the net the user would need to provide proof the computer/s were no longer infected. Maybe even show they took a course like you have to do when you get a driving offense. I don't think it would take all that long till even a total moron would get the message and try to learn good habits.

To make an anology of sorts should we take away drivers licenses because a person does not know how the transmission works?.
i think drivers should know auto basics but here they do not need to to get a license.

That's nuts!
Actually Microsoft should be held accountable for their unsecured Windows systems with all these gaping holes the hackers find. It is obvious these are all against Microsoft but unfortunately us users get affected. Using GOOD protection software and being up to date daily is a good defense.
Companies such as McAfee still are behind the times along with Norton, as I have lost 4 hard drives to bugs while using these software security programs.
Since then I put my faith in Trend Micro and they are on the ball with sometimes as many as 3 updates a day while the others may give you up dates every other day if you are lucky.
Microsoft needs to make peace with the hackers out there and then we may see a drop in trojans etc.
As for car drivers turn signals are standard NOT an option, so use them!!!!!

why not the service provider make sure system is virus free before it gets to your computer......hello!! it's their server

Yes lets start cutting all the computer illiterate people off from the net. That makes sense, alienate 75% of an ISP's customers to protect the other 25%. Then when the 75% decided to get their internet disconnected the rest of us get to pay even more for the internet, Yippie!! Not to mention it's an internet that would then have lost a lot of it's usefulness. Most of your mmo friends are gone. You would actually have to call people to find out what's new since most of them no longer have facebook. You wanna show your friends a video you made then you have to make hardcopies and deliver them. Not to mention that due to lack of traffic a lot of websites that we take for granted will either disappear or become pay sites. Yes this is a great idea, lets destroy the net.

I am for most things that would defeat spammers and hackers, However I do not trust my goverrnmemnt who have proven themselves unable to handle their real affairs enough to allow them access to help handle mine. There should be some serious punishment for hackers that ae caught. Paying back waht they steel should be manadtory and if they haven't got it to give back Ican find plenty of cheap labour they can do until they have made good or preferably died trying

Did you actually read the original post?
Did you actually read all of mine?

It's not computer illerate that either of us are talking about, it's people who's computers become part of a bot net. At most we're taling about 5% of the worlds computers, more likely less then 1%.
Bot net's are a major tool of online crimnals, which are currently ruining the internet. As for the the last bot net to hit the news, I read many of the compromised computers were not owned by private citizens any way.
A little suggestion, before you fly off the handle, actually understand what your flying off the handel about, ok?

"Microsoft corporate vice president of trustworthy computing Scott Charney said that if a computer gets infected by malicious software, then it is up to Internet service providers to quarantine it, cutting it off from the Internet until it can be fixed. "

It doesn't specify that the virus must connect you to a botnet, just malicious software. That covers a whole plethora of infections. And that covers pretty much 75% of Microsoft users, who either don't know enough or just don't care about protecting themselves.
Also it's called hyperbole, tinged with sarcasm. Not flying off the handle. I was making an exaggerated claim about how "great" this idea is.

yeah...just slap it with taxes...that will fix everything! The internet has two problems: a BIG one and two smaller ones. The big problem is the array of thieves that infest the net. They need to get locked up for some serious away time as they are vandals costing us all HUGE money.

Get somebody to calculatev the environmental cost of generating all the electricity needed to fuel all thos spammers and phishers and telemarketers! Kill them and the air would be cleaner!

The two smaller problems are these: Firstly, that the government is doing NOTHING to stop cyber crime. The government has simply decided that their own raises and pensions come before protecting the public by jailing criminals! The second problem is the computer illiterates who believe that the `free` antivirus software they are downloading is equal to the stuff that must be bought in a computer store! The free software is free simply because it is out of date and no longer fully effective and is being offered simply as an advertising come on and the dolts using it dont realize this!

Apparently splittingwood works for a high priced av software company. I've used them all since they have been out and I'll tell ya what the 2 free ones I've used update more and catch what the huge brand names don't. As for paying 50 to 100$ can a year for AV software is more of an uniformed doltish move.
As for policing the net and taxing the $%#@ out of it... All that's goung to do is create more overpaid, govt jobs that used said taxes to pay themselves.

Once a PC is affected the OS should realize this since it updates itself, and disable the internet commection and inform the end user that he needs to scan and disinfect his system. Hackers couldn't hack if the OS was secure.

I have an anti virus and its is up to date and it has not stopped viruses from infecting my PC. If a hacker wants to infect a machine or hack into it - it will happen and no password, tax, anti-virus up to date.... will stop them. Putting a tax on the user after they already pay high prices to use the internet that does not belong to anyone is ridiculous. That being said getting the government involved will solve nothing. If a PC is guaranteed after being affected it means they can't get online and most of us use the internet to get help about said problems. In my case i have done this many times as companies that provide the program or service have never or very rarely helped me.
Also that being said the anti-virus that is rated top or best for the year (which is what i have) still does not catch everything, so why should i get quarantined when i am making sure that i listen to all the warnings, and have taken the necessary precautions.

I think this is a terrible idea. You can't blame alot of the problems and coding holes on the end user when the companies who make and update this code don't fully do their job. Plus if someone with the "proper AV software" (I've personally used norton, avg, mcaffee, and zonealarm, and find none of them to function very well) gets disconnected enough times they will just cancel their internet connection or look for an alternative illegal one. For teaching people to use computers, a goodly bit of the problem is the older generations (in alot of cases), or younger children who may not necessarily know how to use computers properly or may just click "yes" to every pop up imaginable. Training of some sort may help them to understand the basics of how computers work and how/what they should and should not do online and everything else. The government is NEVER a good solution in any case.

Microsoft corporate vice president of trustworthy computing Scott Charney has some balls to even think of introducing an internet tax due to rampant cyber crime, botnets and zombie hordes of pc's.It's their OS (Windows) with all its security flaws that has allowed things to get to this point, lol suggesting the tax is like the Mafia demanding protection money, come on Microsoft go back to the drawing board and produce some reliable code for your OS and stay out of our internet business.

The internet is free you cant tax it because it belongs to no one just like you cant tax oxygen.Besides ISPs already charge tax to deliver it, billions of people are online, taxing the internet would be the biggest cash grab in history lol until they start taxing oxygen.

get out of here,that is not the solution.THE BIG PROBLEM is with the makers of computers that cant make good PC's.It them who have all these open door so hackers can get in.IT IS NOT the user fault.Give it to big company to put the blame on the users so they wont have to fix their system.I say go to HELL big brother.

LGF, must desagree with you.All our issues are from the maker of OS .
Dont blame the user if the equipment is not good.
As mention by many anty-virus are a joke.
Most anty-virus and firewall slow a PC so bad that no wonder many ppl. dont use them.
Start by making a good product then maybe MAYBE I will change my way to use PC.

Hey,arent we paying for internet services already?
Arent they the one using slow download on customer?
Hell the way i look at it the should be the one to protect the network the rent us.
After all its a service and the delivery is bad.
You dont need big brother to see that all BIG CO will use every mean to stop losing money and get the user to pay for their mistakes.

Let's think for a second on a few of the points made here:

Microsoft is basically attacking the government with their comments. When various governments brought Antitrust lawsuits against them, they effectively chopped up the various aspects of the computer system software in a somewhat futile attempt to create a marketplace for software vendors (ie Internet Browser, Antivirus Software, Firewalls, etc.). By doing this, they introduced more potential places for bugs, holes and vulnerabilities. Microsoft knows this, but can't do much about it other then pass the responsibility to ISPs and governments since integration is no longer an option for them.

ISPs should be actively quarantining systems that are flagrantly infected. If a system is so obviously infected that the ISP can see it as an anomoly on the network, then it should be cutoff and the customer contacted. By cutting an infected system off, the ISP saves bandwidth with their provider since they pay someone too, prevents other customers from getting infected (a further bandwidth protecting measure) and give great customer service by letting the customer know they're infected. Some analysis of the data the system was sending might even yield the infection source and identify possible rememdy options for the customer.

Lastely, there was the inflamatory words of government and taxes prominently in the article. Good job by the writer getting everyone's attention. That being said, a lot of people got stuck on that point. As I just pointed out, it's a matter of making ISPs understand why quarntining customers is a good idea. They'll find better and cheaper ways of doing it on their own once they start. Government might need to give them a swift kick in the butt to get them going though.

Everyone(Microsoft, Government, ISPS and End Users) have a role to play in keeping the internet secure and this suggestion is a good starting point for what may become something great.

Yes I know the problem lies more with microsoft and security companies then with the user, I was taking a sarcastic approach as to why this is a good idea. Short version is I think the idea is stupid.

Proper security on your computer can not protect you from everything. If you go to shady places and do shady things then your giving the virus an opening. But if your careful, stay away from pirates, you will have very few problems.
This is why I love running windows and mac, at least I don't have to worry about a virus on my Macbook(well it's a very tiny concern anyway).

"To make an analogy of sorts should we take away drivers licenses because a person does not know how the transmission works?."

If your vehicle fails inspection you will not be allow to drive it. You may drive other cares, but not that one until it's fixed. Cutting off internet access to an infected machine would be a similar situation, though obviously a defective car can be physically dangerous in a way that a PC in a bot-net really isn't.

It's not such a bad idea depending on how it's implemented.

In Canada, Rogers and Bell already do cut off access to the internet for infected computers, effectively quarentining them. One person in your household gets a virus? All computers in your house get cut off. Learned this the hard way, thought of switching to Bell and found out they do it too.

It is not the fault of Micro$oft most of the time but people who are too impatient to read the messages that the computer sends them. I agree that there are "gaping holes" in microsoft's architecture but for the most part, Windows is the most popular piece of software. Their O.S. must be compatible with every little obscure piece of software that even the most twisted user may think of and guess what else, they have to provide ways for programmers to build programs compatible with your architecture. Do you see a possible security hole there? If not, ask yourself if every police officer is entirely trustworthy. Or every politician who is entrusted to take the needs of the people into account. Are you beginning to catch my drift? Do you for a moment think that if you drove the most popular car that it wouldn't be a target? Of course it would. Just park in an urban area and wait. Sure, A/V's don't catch everything but not everyone who surfs gets infected. The most obvious explanation for that is USER ERROR. When the O.S. pops up a dialog box, how about reading it and thinking about it. Hey, here's an idea, make friends with a comp-geek who can help you out before you get into a jam. Most of the conversations I have with people who's computers I have fixed go something like this.
Them: "Yeah, the computer said something..."
Me: "Said something?"
Them: "Yeah, it was in a box"
Me: "Any idea what it might have said?"
Them: "Oh, I don't really know, something about allowing something..."
Me: "So what happened?"
Them" :"I pressed ok so it would go away."
Me (out loud): "Oh, maybe that is what the problem is, we can start there."
Me (in my head) "You stupid S.O.B. What, are you f***ing illiterate? Dumbass. I should just tell you it is unfixable and erase all your data. I hope that you drive better than you read. You really need a kick in the head."
Them "Think you can fix it?"
Me "Probably, but I can't guarantee it. You should really pay attention to those boxes though. They are important, like the check engine light on your car..."
Them "Sure...no problem. *SNORE*

I agree,

Getting the government involved in controlling people's computers is not a good idea. They have far too much controll as it is. If that were to happen I would most definitely cancel my internet forever and use it only as a home tool.
About viruses and infecting others in the community, the providers can set up a system wherby specific viruses and the extent of their threat are identified on specific computers and as a result all links to that computer/address are cut or quarintined until the infected is repaired. If the individual computer continues to attempt access without attending to the problem the provider downloads a program that instantly cleans the computer's drive.