IBM report reviews Internet crime

Wed Feb 13 23:35:00 UTC 2008

JC Dill wrote:
>
> I'm really surprised that ISPs haven't banded together to sue 
> Microsoft for negligently selling and distributing an insecure OS that 
> is an Attractive Nuisance - causing the ISPs (who don't own the OS 
> infected computers) harm from the network traffic the infected OSs 
> send, and causing them untold support dollars to handle the problem.
>
> If every big ISP joined a class action lawsuit to force Microsoft to 
> pay up for the time ISPs spend fixing viruses on Windows computer, 
> Microsoft would get a LOT more proactive about solving this problem 
> directly.  The consumers have no redress against MS because of the 
> EULA, but this doesn't extend to other computer owners (e.g. ISPs) who 
> didn't agree to the EULA on the infected machine but who are impacted 
> by the infection.
>
> jc

I think I would rather see a class action against Symantec for the 
hundreds of hours ISP's waste fixing customers mail server settings that 
Symantec sees fit to screw up with every update.   We can always tell 
when they have pushed a major update - hundreds of calls from mail users 
who can no longer send mail.

It's 2008.   How bloody hard is it to notice that the mail server SMTP 
port is 587 and authentication is turned on?   Why do they mess with it?

-- 

Mark Radabaugh
Amplex
419.837.5015 x21
mark at amplex.net