Coffeehouse Thread

48 posts

12 minutes to infection

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    Badgerguy

    After seeing it referenced at Slashdot, I looked up this new article from Sophos, claiming that an " unprotected, unpatched Windows PC" would have a 50% chance of being infected by a virus after going online.

    I wonder what Sophos mean by 'Unpatched'  What versions of Windows are they talking about?  By Unpatched, do they mean XP RTM?

  • User profile image
    Dr. Shim

    Possibly Windows XP, sans any updates including Service Pack 1 or 2.

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    Infected not so much, but a completely unpatched (so no service packs, nothing) Windows XP or Windows Server 2003 machine would get shut down by something like Blaster before you have the time to install updates.

    This is one the main reasons why the firewall is enabled by default in Windows XP SP2, and even in Windows Server 2003 SP1, where the firewall is not enabled by default, it will block all incoming traffic after a clean install (from a slipstreamed CD) until the "Secure Your Server" wizard has been run, which allows you to install updates.

  • User profile image
    Blkbam

    This is a bunch of BS and a major exageration.  I had to reformat my drive this week and I desided to test this theory since I've heard it before also.  I left my pc on all night with a fresh install of Windows XP, SQL Server 2000 and a port monitor (no SP's) and guess what, nothing.  Not a virus, worm or even a port scan.

    I installed some AV software afterwards and did a scan just to check and I got nothing.  This is just an assumption to try to prove how unsecure/unsafe MS products are and people are quick to jump on believing it based on the company's history.

    Oh and incase you're wondering, the PC was hooked up to a router but I moved it into the DMZ to rule that out as well.

  • User profile image
    Steve411

    Don't they call an "unprotected, unpatched PC" linux?..

    Hm..
    Steve.

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    I've had a PC running fine without a firewall, no updates, no antivirus, and no router, and my computer was virus free for many years, no problem whatsoever.




    mVPstar

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    I don't know anout XP particularly, since I've never tried that. But I have had Windows Server 2003 boxes shut down within minutes of startup if they were unpatched and unfirewalled.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    Blkbam wrote:
    This is a bunch of BS and a major exageration.  I had to reformat my drive this week and I desided to test this theory since I've heard it before also.  I left my pc on all night with a fresh install of Windows XP, SQL Server 2000 and a port monitor (no SP's) and guess what, nothing.  Not a virus, worm or even a port scan.


    Ah yes, but are you behind a NAT or router?

  • User profile image
    Manip

    Well I think some of you are talking rubbish as I get scanned by a trojan according to my logs every 5min's or so... Although it's in Sophos's best interest to make the results look as bad a possible you can't call what they are saying a flat out lie if you run even the most basic tests yourself (and are not an AOL user).

  • User profile image
    Cairo

    mVPstar wrote:
    I've had a PC running fine without a firewall, no updates, no antivirus, and no router, and my computer was virus free for many years, no problem whatsoever.


    Running Windows? That's highly dubious.

  • User profile image
    Augusto

    IT takes about that much time to get infected in our corporate LAN. I had to reinstall Win2K and I wouldn't last more than 15 minutes connected to the network. Same for our lab machines.

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    Augusto wrote:
    IT takes about that much time to get infected in our corporate LAN.


    That says as much about your corporate LAN as it does about the vunerabilities of an unpatched two year old OS.

  • User profile image
    Steve411

    I stay virus-free and spyware-free for months, even a year at times. But now I'm infected and I'm too lazy to clean it up again.

    My software dev PC is clean though.
    Steve.

  • User profile image
    Steve411

    Blaster was a good virus. We should get a few more like that, it was quite the mind bogler.

    Steve.

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    Cairo wrote:
    mVPstar wrote: I've had a PC running fine without a firewall, no updates, no antivirus, and no router, and my computer was virus free for many years, no problem whatsoever.


    Running Windows? That's highly dubious.




    This was well over 7 years ago.  I started caring about computer security after Blaster came out. Tongue Out

    Edit: This was Windows 95 that I kept for many years without security swag.


    It could also vary from network to network. I had another unpatched, unfirewalled Win2k Pro PC on for at least 2 hours when the Blaster worm struck and my system didn't shutdown. When I finally did get a software firewall that same week, I kept monitoring the event logs. There were very little attempts (which I assumed was blaster) on my system...about one every hour.  As far as port scanning, I've only gotten port scanned around 3-4 times within 3 years. Trojan attacks...~9/10 times.

    Then again, my software firewall could have let a lot of stuff through, thus making my event log flawed a bit....


    Well, now I have an MS router in addition to a software firewall so I haven't really noticed any attacks on my system. The router event logs confuse me. Smiley


    mVPstar

  • User profile image
    Manip

    mVPstar wrote:
    I've had a PC running fine without a firewall, no updates, no antivirus, and no router, and my computer was virus free for many years, no problem whatsoever.


    mVPstar wrote:


    This was well over 7 years ago.  I started caring about computer security after Blaster came out.

    Also, this was Windows 95.


    I'm sorry but your a lying scuzz-bucket. You talk rubbish then make up things to back peddle out of it when you figure out we are not as stupid (or ignorant) as you take us for.

    YOU ARE WELL AWARE THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CURRENT INSTALLATIONS OF WINDOWS XP OR 2003!

  • User profile image
    Steve411

    Manip wrote:

    I'm sorry but your a lying scuzz-bucket.

    haha! Quote of the day!

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    I was merely clarifying my post above that this was a system in a different time period.

    Did I ever claim you were stupid Manip? (though I have no clue how you would come to that conclusion)


    EDIT: For Windows XP, I've had that on for a month and nothing noticeable happened. And what I was talking about with Windows 2k Pro, that was after XP came out (in other words, in the modern time period of virus/worms/etc..)

    mVPstar

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.