Kaspersky anti-virus for Mac
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Chris Ridd on 22 Apr 2010 14:15 On 2010-04-22 18:43:40 +0100, David Pitt said: > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >> They *appear* to be selling what's called snake oil. ie software that >> pretends to add security, but doesn't, and is thus considered to be >> untrustworthy. > > It may *appear* to some to be snake oil, but that is not certainty. Would a > bank be sufficiently cynical to peddle 'snake oil' to shovel > responsibilities onto their customers? Actually I would not be too confident > about answering that one. I agree about the lack of certainty, which is why they should be asked to properly describe their approach and prove they do what they claim. It does not seem to me to be an unreasonable thing to ask. > I remain resolutely in 'don't know' mode. And it doesn't matter for the > reason given below. > > [snip] > >>> I feel I would definitely be in the shite in the event of fraud and I >>> had to say to HSBC that I was not using Trusteer Rapport as they >>> recommend. I misread what you said before - sorry I was concentrating on other things. I don't think you would be in the shite here, as I think the burden of proof is still on the bank/their vendor to show that Trusteer does what is being claimed. -- Chris
From: Andy Hewitt on 22 Apr 2010 14:29 Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > On 2010-04-22 17:32:45 +0100, David Pitt said: > > > thewildrover(a)me.com (Andy Hewitt) wrote: > > > >> Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On 2010-04-22 15:52:48 +0100, Jaimie Vandenbergh said: > >> > >> [..] > >>>> At least Kaspersky is a decent choice, unlike the shiteware that > >>>> Natwest is foisting on people (which I've forgotten the name of), > >>>> doesn't actually trash your Mac and render it completely useless. > >>> > >>> Do you mean the shiteware that is Trusteer Rapport? > >> > >> That's the one HSBC are using now too. At least they're trying I guess. > > > > I am sure there is shite involved somewhere but I am sure where that shite > > in fact lurks. > > So you haven't read about it then? > > > I do have Trusteer Rapport running with Safari on my iMac, it is not shite > > in the sense that it destroys, trashes or otherwise messes up the Mac, it > > sits there as good as gold, no obvious shite there then. > > > > The concept of Trusteer Rapport apport may or not be shite, I wouldn't know. > > They *appear* to be selling what's called snake oil. ie software that > pretends to add security, but doesn't, and is thus considered to be > untrustworthy. I was expectign it to be that way. I just installed it to get rid of the annoying nag boxes. It seems to have no effect on my system otherwise. > Getting some evidence that it does actually do what they claim would be > a good idea, and there are very widely accepted standards for all this. > > > I feel I would definitely be in the shite in the event of fraud and I had to > > say to HSBC that I was not using Trusteer Rapport as they recommend. > > That's true! Also one of my thoughts too. -- Andy Hewitt <http://web.me.com/andrewhewitt1/>
From: Pd on 22 Apr 2010 16:02 Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > I was trying to find the post from Bruce that proposed asking the banks > to get the security software properly certified (CC) first. Why would > you trust something *claiming* to be secure? From: Bruce Horrocks <07.013(a)scorecrow.com> Subject: Re: Trusteer Rapport - any bugs? Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 23:19:13 +0000 Message-ID: <8129bhFdeiU1(a)mid.individual.net> On 25/03/2010 19:26, The Older Gentleman wrote: > but before doing what the bank wants Anyone wishing to stall their bank could write and ask why Trusteer Rapport doesn't appear to have a CESG Claims Tested Mark nor a Common Criteria certification. <http://www.cctmark.gov.uk/> <http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/> After all, CCTM only costs �10-�20k to get evaluated which is peanuts to a bank serious about protecting its customers... Regards, -- Bruce Horrocks Surrey England (bruce at scorecrow dot com) -- Pd
From: Jaimie Vandenbergh on 22 Apr 2010 16:11 On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:32:45 +0100, David Pitt <null(a)null.null> wrote: >thewildrover(a)me.com (Andy Hewitt) wrote: > >> Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: >> >> > On 2010-04-22 15:52:48 +0100, Jaimie Vandenbergh said: >> >> [..] >> > > At least Kaspersky is a decent choice, unlike the shiteware that >> > > Natwest is foisting on people (which I've forgotten the name of), >> > > doesn't actually trash your Mac and render it completely useless. >> > >> > Do you mean the shiteware that is Trusteer Rapport? >> >> That's the one HSBC are using now too. At least they're trying I guess. > >I am sure there is shite involved somewhere but I am sure where that shite >in fact lurks. > >I do have Trusteer Rapport running with Safari on my iMac, it is not shite >in the sense that it destroys, trashes or otherwise messes up the Mac, it >sits there as good as gold, no obvious shite there then. Coo. It's either been radically improved or you're very lucky. The three installations I've rescued were all running like a badly infected Windows box - sloooow at file browsing, Parallels crashing, browser crashing, not shutting down, that sort of thing. Uninstall, and they spring back to life. >I feel I would definitely be in the shite in the event of fraud and I had to >say to HSBC that I was not using Trusteer Rapport as they recommend. I disagree. It's not part of any contract you have with the bank. Cheers - Jaimie -- #include "clue.h"
From: zoara on 22 Apr 2010 17:39
David Pitt <news(a)pittdj.co.uk> wrote: > Would a > bank be sufficiently cynical to peddle 'snake oil' to shovel > responsibilities onto their customers? The bank itself may not be aware that it is snake oil. -z- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm |