What CIA thinks of your av
- Thread starter JoeTech
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 2,979
- Location
- Fort Myers, FL
haha, glad I use built-in defender and backblaze online backup.
cypress
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 1,496
- Location
- South Florida
Lol
mraikes
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 1,856
- Location
- Los Lunas, NM
Sounds like it's all pretty outdated.
But mostly confirms my belief that A/V products only provide a modicum of protection from typical drive by attacks and won't protect you at all from an actual targeted attack by a knowledgeable individual.
But mostly confirms my belief that A/V products only provide a modicum of protection from typical drive by attacks and won't protect you at all from an actual targeted attack by a knowledgeable individual.
Built in defender and Microsoft security essentials aren't in this article but are listed in the actual wikileaks report so I wouldn't feel too safe.
Not many security people seem to be too worried because it sounds like this is all outdated stuff that probably no longer works or been patched. I'm sure the CIA already has newer stuff that does work though.
tucsonpc
Active Member
- Reaction score
- 174
- Location
- Tucson, AZ
They're akin to locks on doors: they reduce the chances of a casual breach, but if anyone is dedicated, the security can be bypassed.
GTP
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 9,902
- Location
- Adelaide, Australia
I'm sure that an organisation like the CIA would have "operatives" working for those companies!
jfm
Active Member
- Reaction score
- 114
- Location
- Montreal, Canada
Worthless effort, the purpose of an antivirus is to protect end users against viruses and random (automated) intrusions.
Not to protect against a zealous hacker focusing on a random user, barely.
Fear mongering article.
Not to protect against a zealous hacker focusing on a random user, barely.
Fear mongering article.
ComputerRepairTech
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 804
- Location
- Columbia, SC
the article is likely referring to a bypass without any signs that something is wrong. crippling an AV without worrying about what the user notices shouldn't be a challenge for the cia.
Rocco
Active Member
- Reaction score
- 68
- Location
- Wyoming, USA
I am certain that as a home user, there is absolutely nothing I am willing to do will keep a determined hacker out. I have CEH, and the Air Force sent me to various courses for ethical hacking for around 100 hours. (last one was 7 years ago, so I am way out of date, lol)
But there is nothing I am willing to do to completely make my computer hacker proof. There is nothing a small amount business owner, with limited IT budget could do to make it hacker proof. In fact, if you look at large companies who get hacked, I have no doubt if you ever become lax, no amount of money can ever keep you safe from a determined hacker.
What AV does though, is keeps the lazy people out. It shouldn't be as easy as your child clicking on a link for someone to have access to all your banking records. It shouldn't be so easy for a 16 year old to park across the street and access your network and your computer. That is what a decent program will stop.
But there is nothing I am willing to do to completely make my computer hacker proof. There is nothing a small amount business owner, with limited IT budget could do to make it hacker proof. In fact, if you look at large companies who get hacked, I have no doubt if you ever become lax, no amount of money can ever keep you safe from a determined hacker.
What AV does though, is keeps the lazy people out. It shouldn't be as easy as your child clicking on a link for someone to have access to all your banking records. It shouldn't be so easy for a 16 year old to park across the street and access your network and your computer. That is what a decent program will stop.
Similar threads
