Text 2046, 190 rader
Skriven 2005-01-18 08:55:48 av Robert Comer (1:379/45)
   Kommentar till text 2041 av Ellen K. (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Do we protect users from their own stupidity?
=========================================================
From: "Robert Comer" <bobcomer_removeme@mindspring.com>

> Please, I'm still using WinCIM 2.6, forces everything to plain text.

I remember, that was a more general comment than just directed at you.  You
actually are less vulnerable because of your email client.

- Bob Comer


"Ellen K." <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:61cpu01ohf15aapo0ocagqvds0m6369at4@4ax.com...
> Please, I'm still using WinCIM 2.6, forces everything to plain text.
>
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:02:31 -0500, "Robert Comer"
> <bobcomer_removeme@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> <41ec35d6@w3.nls.net>:
>
>>I just got a very good imitation of an official Paypal email, this one's
>>going to fool a few... :(
>>
>>There's actually an easy way to tell it's a phishing attack, at least in
>>OE,
>>just move the mouse cursor over the link and look down at the bottom
>>status
>>bar, you see what the link really points to.  If the domain doesn't look
>>right for whatever company, it's phishing.
>>
>>- Bob Comer
>>
>>
>>"Ellen K." <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote in message
>>news:ltcou0lhvanrbp6su81dokr26fcrpiftfa@4ax.com...
>>> Periodically I get phishing emails pretending to be from ebay, and they
>>> even manage to get "ebay" into the headers, but if you look up the IP
>>> address of course you find out it's not... but what percentage of users
>>> A) know how to find the header;
>>> B) know how to read it; or
>>> C) know how to look up an IP address?
>>>
>>> On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:14:01 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote in message
>>> <41eaf508@w3.nls.net>:
>>>
>>>>   I disagree.
>>>>
>>>>   People do very much know the difference between their own computer
>>>> and
>>>> the other computers referenced in phishing attacks.  They know that
>>>> email
>>>> comes from somewhere outside their computer.  They know the web site to
>>>> which they are referred is not their computer.  They still are fooled.
>>>>
>>>>   People know they are choosing to download and install software from
>>>> the
>>>> Internet.  What they may not know is that it is or contains spyware.
>>>> There is no confusion over boundaries.
>>>>
>>>>   I believe your whole idea of trust is off base.  People aren't making
>>>> decisions on whether or not to trust particular machines.  I douby very
>>>> much most people even think that way.  People place trust in other
>>>> people
>>>> or in some cases who they believe those people are.  Phishing attacks
>>>> for
>>>> bank sites succeed because the people the fall pray to them believe
>>>> that
>>>> the people sending the email are valid representitives of the bank and
>>>> they trust those people.
>>>>
>>>>   As for your initial premise, I honestly don't know what it is you
>>>> believe is consistent that should not be or is different that should
>>>> not
>>>> be.  You can't be referring to the browser which is almost never used
>>>> for
>>>> the local computer and clearly identifies what is local and what is
>>>> not.
>>>>
>>>>   Your claim regarding phishing is also wrong.  The address bar is one
>>>> possible indicator to users.  Phishing attacks preceeded any of these
>>>> and
>>>> continue without them.  I've seen phishing emails that make no attempt
>>>> to
>>>> mask the domain to which they refer.  People still get fooled.  The
>>>> address bar probably means little to many users.  I can tell when
>>>> speaking with and helping non-technical users that even though they get
>>>> that they type into the address bar to go to a site they do not always
>>>> get that it is overloaded to provide feedback to them where they have
>>>> gone.  The same with the status bar.  Their have been status bar
>>>> spoofs.
>>>> They make little difference.  Do any of these make a difference to you
>>>> so
>>>> that you would be fooled?
>>>>
>>>>Rich
>>>>
>>>>  "Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message news:41ea4440@w3.nls.net...
>>>>  part of the reason it's so easy to fool people is because of
>>>> Microsoft.
>>>> Remember some years ago when I said to make a consistant interface that
>>>> blurs the line between the local machine and remote machines/internet
>>>> machines was a mistake? Well that's one of the big reasons why people
>>>> today are so easy to fool. They don't understand the concept of
>>>> trusted/untrusted machines because it all looks the same to them. They
>>>> honestly don't know where their machine ends and the rest of the world
>>>> begins.
>>>>
>>>>  I understood the logic behind making that a consistent interface and
>>>> blurring the line but I saw the problem with it as well. How is a user
>>>> to
>>>> know the difference between a remote website and a help page from one
>>>> of
>>>> their own programs if there is no difference?
>>>>
>>>>  As for not knowing anyone who was infected due to the exploit of a
>>>> bug,
>>>> doesn't phishing work because of a bug that allows IE to show one
>>>> address
>>>> in the address bar while in fact it's talking to another address? What,
>>>> doesn't that count?
>>>>
>>>>  Geo.
>>>>    "Rich" <@> wrote in message news:41e9f4ea$1@w3.nls.net...
>>>>       You can't protect them from their own stupidity.  I've seen
>>>> plenty
>>>> of examples of people getting infected with spyware due to their own
>>>> explicit actions, either approving when asked if something should be
>>>> installed or explicitly downloading and installing something that is or
>>>> includes spyware.  I do not know of anyone personally that was infected
>>>> due to an exploit of a bug.  Phishing is another example that relies
>>>> almost entirely on people being to trusting and doing something they
>>>> shouldn't.  I haven't seen an email virus in a long time that did not
>>>> rely on the user following instructions in the email to act against his
>>>> own interest and run or even save then open and run something they
>>>> shouldn't.  We are well beyond what many folks would consider security.
>>>> To protect against people making these kinds of mistakes you have to
>>>> take
>>>> choices they can't be trusted making away from them.  That upsets the
>>>> folks that can be trusted to or want to make these choices unhappy.
>>>> This
>>>>isn't far from the idea that putting you in a straightjacket makes you
>>>>more secure because you are less likely to hurt yourself.  As for how
>>>>people react to this, do you remember the reaction to cars that buzzed
>>>>or
>>>>otherwise made noise when the driver or a passenger did not wear his
>>>>seat
>>>>belt?  It wasn't positive.
>>>>
>>>>    Rich
>>>>      "Ellen K." <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote in
>>>> message news:48qju0547j4l00akdf69j0bip7fgj8bmp5@4ax.com...
>>>>      And that is a very big problem when trying to figure out what
>>>> security
>>>>      features should be built in or what functionality should be
>>>> allowed.
>>>> Do
>>>>      we protect users from their own stupidity?   I guess there is a
>>>>      rationale for doing so in that if the masses' machines are laxly
>>>> secured
>>>>      (if at all), the danger to _everyone_ increases.
>>>>
>>>>      On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:07:12 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote in message
>>>>      <41e30a96@w3.nls.net>:
>>>>
>>>>      >   I agree there are a great many people that have no interest in
>>>> or familiarity with exercising the control available to them.  That
>>>> will
>>>> always be true.
>>>>      >
>>>>      >Rich
>>>>      >
>>>>      >  "Ellen K." <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote in
>>>> message news:7og4u0pj8f0nq10sm8t2covkac7q75oj1s@4ax.com...
>>>>      >  Well, I think this conversation is all over the place regarding
>>>> who we
>>>>      >  are talking about when we talk about users.  The folks here are
>>>> an
>>>>      >  entirely different animal from the famous great unwashed
>>>> masses.
>>>>      >
>>>>      >  On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 01:40:28 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote in message
>>>>      >  <41e0fbe8@w3.nls.net>:
>>>>      >
>>>>      >  >   Because you are in control, my point to george.
>>>>      >  >
>>>>      >  >Rich
>>>
>>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)