keep myself informed about ongoing threats. store sensitive data on offline/encrypted drives,ġ0. keep 1-2 months' backup of everything on external disks,Ĩ. disable scripting and stuff like Flash and Java unless on a case-by-case base,ħ. run real-time AV, use a firewall, set UAC to the max, stay behind a router whenever possible,Ħ. keep Windows and other programs "happy" (updated against vulnerabilities),ĥ. always multi-scan new software before install, no matter how "trusted" the developer,Ĥ. only download from developer/trusted sites,Ģ. So far, my anti-malware approach has included the following:ġ. I just hope they find the culprit (was it an inside job? or, where did the malware come from?) so they can stop it for good.īut, more in general, the CCleaner malware incident makes me wonder: how can I keep my Windows PC safe in a world where even software houses are compromised? It's not the first time and it won't be last. In other words, I am still going to use CCleaner and other Piriform products. There's no place safer than the bank the day after the robbery. That an update downloaded direct from the originator actually contained malware is a pretty bad look for all concerned.Īgreed. I've still done multiple full scans with every bit of security software I have but I'm still not happy. But it would appear us 64bit OS CCleaner users may have dodged the bullet by luck and nothing else. I've been wading through the reams of stuff here and elsewhere about this and maybe I've missed it but I'm still not certain what this means. You'd hope with a 64bit OS only the 64bit EXE would have been used but can you be sure? The problem is CCleaner includes what I'd assume is a 32bit version (how do you tell?) as part of the 64bit package, something that is fairly common practice so it would work even if you downloaded the wrong version. I also use CCleaner portable version on a flash drive very occasionally with a 32bit OS system but luckily, and most unlike me, I'd forgotten to update that during the period in question. I'm certain I must have installed the 64bit version of that release. That would include me as I diligently check for updates at least once a month and I still had (now thoroughly removed) that version update installer in the short term archive I keep. Polonus (volunteer website security analyst and website error-hunter)Īs somebody earlier here also mentioned even those who 'only' installed the 64bit version of the compromised release may also have had an infected EXE on their machine. Not dangerous, but leaves room for improvement, but we meet certain restriction, because it also has to run on older clients. Preferred clients: Compatible Clients: Android 2.3.7, Apple ATS 9, Baidu Jan 2015, BingBot Dec 2013, BingPreview Dec 2013, Chrome 27, Edge 12, Firefox 21, Googlebot Oct 2013, IE 7, Java 6u45, OpenSSL 0.9.8y, Opera 12.15, Safari 5, Tor 17.0.9, Yahoo Slurp Oct 2013, YandexBot May 2014 The response exceeds the maximum file size allowed by the application. Here a quick and dirty report on the avast download link. Not directly related - the download link you gave (well the technology firm - akamai was also targeted by the very Group 72 hackers during the recent incident), akamai has a embedded transparancy Symantec Class 3 Secure CA G4 intermediate certificate and tested certificate.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |