Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nuking vulnerable computers? More

Nuking vulnerable computers?

Comments Filter:
  • If it's possible to remotely identify insecure machines (and they wouldn't be insecure if it wasn't), then it's possible for ISP's to not allow connections from such machines. No need to do anything to the user's machine or even care if they ever get it fixed -- as long as they're not on the net, there's not a problem (for other machines)
    • If it's possible to remotely identify insecure machines (and they wouldn't be insecure if it wasn't), then it's possible for ISP's to not allow connections from such machines. No need to do anything to the user's machine or even care if they ever get it fixed -- as long as they're not on the net, there's not a problem (for other machines)

      Good idea. And don't let them get on the internet until they download the latest patch to fix that problem... Oh wait a second... :)
      • That's not a problem either. You can block them from the internet but still give them access to a local site from which they can download patches (or, for example, only give allow them to connect with the IP block for windowsupdate.microsoft.com if it's a windows issue, etc.)
        • You can block them from the internet but still give them access to a local site from which they can download patches

          I doubt MS is going to allow that to happen. This would take away MS's ability to verify the validity of each patch. someone could hack into "bob's internet service" servers and put a trojan in the patches that are supposed to fix the problems. This would mean instead of ONE source for patches, there would be thousands.

          This could potentially make MS look bad, and take away their control.
  • Hey, I'm all for it. Less trouble for the ones that maintain their system. Your analogy is flawed, though. If I drive around with broken lights and the cops see it, they will stop me, fine me and the next day I will have to present my car at the police station with fixed lights.

    Also, we have mandatory yearly inspections... Burnt out lights is failing the inspection and you have to repair or destroy the car.

    Both the above scenario's are about the same as "disconnection infected hosts".

    I didn't see

  • Holy crap. Let's send nuclear missles up the tailpipe of any car with a burnt out light. After all, it is a safety hazard, and we want the public to be protected.

    Actually, a form of that is already happening. I rent a rack from Rackshack, and because of an exploit in Half Life (used to run a game server on the side) the box got owned. Rackshack caught it before I did, and took it offline. I had to call it, get them to reset it with a new hard drive and mount the old drive manually and restore files (a

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close