Is it only Windows that affected by Ransomeware?

[WotEver]

1 hour ago, mross said:

It's worth using the Microsoft tool to check if your hardware is compatible with Windows 10.  but this is for people who have Win7 or 8.

Trouble is, that tool said I'd be okay. And it was okay until the last major Win10 update. Now it's not okay, no amount of tweaking has any effect, and no improved drivers are available.

[mross]

Have you tried a Refresh?  https://www.groovypost.com/howto/windows-10-reset-your-pc-feature/

[bizzard]

My W10 has just updated. It robbed me of 2 Gorillabites of data. Not pleased.

[Robbo]

18 minutes ago, bizzard said:

My W10 has just updated. It robbed me of 2 Gorillabites of data. Not pleased.

Better than a encrypted hard drive tho?

[WotEver]

8 hours ago, mross said:

Have you tried a Refresh?  https://www.groovypost.com/howto/windows-10-reset-your-pc-feature/

Yeah, but thanks for the suggestion. 

[musicman]

20 hours ago, matty40s said:

Portholes are safer

I agree - my windows let more light in than portholes, but they are not so aesthetically pleasing

[hounddog]

On 5/13/2017 at 11:18, jenevers said:

So can I install that into my Windows Vista laptop?

if you're worried about ransomeware or any other malware the protection, for the single user is extremely simple and doesn't involve upgrading your machine - keep daily backups. There's no excuse not to and it WILL save your bacon in any number of circumstances. Backup drives cost from £50 upwards so there really is no reason not to be doing this, most come with the necessary programmes. 

Gettinh slightly more techie; my preference is for those backups that clone your machine. The last time i needed mine it spent overnight copying itself and i was ready to go in the morning without noticing any difference. 

 

if you're on Apple as the OP appears to be i recommend Carbon Copy Cloner and a couple of Seagate 'cheap as chips' hard drives. 

[hounddog]

On 5/13/2017 at 10:26, mross said:

Smug Apple users beware! https://www.cnet.com/uk/news/apple-users-beware-first-live-ransomware-targeting-mac-found-in-the-wild/

old news; the smart users run Vuze 

[Phil.]

Just an aside to this issue, it does make a mockery of the recent call by government, for tech companies to deliberately create backdoors and holes in their encryption and operating systems, because government agencies can't read bad peoples messages. If this is the damage that can be created by an inadvertent flaw in the system, then it makes no sense to deliberately make them, or will the government compensate innocent people, when they suffer losses because bad people exploit the governments built in weaknesses.

[jenevers]

22 hours ago, hounddog said:

if you're worried about ransomeware or any other malware the protection, for the single user is extremely simple and doesn't involve upgrading your machine - keep daily backups. There's no excuse not to and it WILL save your bacon in any number of circumstances. Backup drives cost from £50 upwards so there really is no reason not to be doing this, most come with the necessary programmes. 

Gettinh slightly more techie; my preference is for those backups that clone your machine. The last time i needed mine it spent overnight copying itself and i was ready to go in the morning without noticing any difference. 

 

if you're on Apple as the OP appears to be i recommend Carbon Copy Cloner and a couple of Seagate 'cheap as chips' hard drives. 

Thanks. I'll try Carbon Copy Cloner. 

Is this what you mean?

https://bombich.com/download

[Chewbacka]

1 hour ago, Phil. said:

Just an aside to this issue, it does make a mockery of the recent call by government, for tech companies to deliberately create backdoors and holes in their encryption and operating systems, because government agencies can't read bad peoples messages. If this is the damage that can be created by an inadvertent flaw in the system, then it makes no sense to deliberately make them, or will the government compensate innocent people, when they suffer losses because bad people exploit the governments built in weaknesses.

Not the same thing at all.  The government simply want a key to un-encrypt your messages so they can read them, they are not asking for flaws that allow others to take complete control of your computer, though I don't suppose they would object if offered.

[mross]

Daily backups would also get encrypted if you left the external hard drive connected!  Burning a backup onto a CD-ROM would be safer since, once written, a CD-ROM cannot be encrypted.  You need a top-rated antivirus (antimalware) program and possibly need to go into the options and select some additional protections.

If the government has the keys to unencrypt your messages then hackers will be able to get hold of them too.  This is what governments don't understand.

[Chewbacka]

20 minutes ago, mross said:

Daily backups would also get encrypted if you left the external hard drive connected!  Burning a backup onto a CD-ROM would be safer since, once written, a CD-ROM cannot be encrypted.  You need a top-rated antivirus (antimalware) program and possibly need to go into the options and select some additional protections.

If the government has the keys to unencrypt your messages then hackers will be able to get hold of them too.  This is what governments don't understand.

I am sure they do understand that and consider that as being a bit of collateral damage.  It would be possible to allow financial and similar communications to banks, building societies etc be fully encrypted, but person to person being easy to open.  Didn't France for some time ban encryption of person to person communications???

Tough I don't like the idea of govt agencies spying on me, I would support the above idea as a price to pay if it prevents terrorists killing people in our country.  Anyway there are so many communications, it will be 99.99% monitored by computer.

Edited May 15, 2017 by Chewbacka

[hounddog]

19 minutes ago, mross said:

Daily backups would also get encrypted if you left the external hard drive connected!  Burning a backup onto a CD-ROM would be safer since, once written, a CD-ROM cannot be encrypted.  You need a top-rated antivirus (antimalware) program and possibly need to go into the options and select some additional protections.

If the government has the keys to unencrypt your messages then hackers will be able to get hold of them too.  This is what governments don't understand.

My main hard disk is 500gb, how many CD-ROMs should I order?

Incidentally, it should be pointed out that backing up your files once encrypted is probably not a good idea.

[Chewbacka]

2 minutes ago, hounddog said:

My main hard disk is 500gb, how many CD-ROMs should I order?

Incidentally, it should be pointed out that backing up your files once encrypted is probably not a good idea.

at least they are safe from being spied on by other hackers and GCHQ 

[rusty69]

5 minutes ago, hounddog said:

Incidentally, it should be pointed out that backing up your files once encrypted is probably not a good idea.

Oh dear, ive been doing just that for years. What are the reasons? 

[hounddog]

14 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

Oh dear, ive been doing just that for years. What are the reasons? 

 I shall rephrase it . 

Backing up your files once encrypted by a hacker is probably not a good idea.

Edited May 15, 2017 by hounddog

[rusty69]

35 minutes ago, hounddog said:

I am sorry that it was too difficult to understand. I shall rephrase it so it's a little easier. Please do let me know if there's any difficult words in it. 

Backing up your files once encrypted by a hacker is probably not a good idea.

There, understand now?

Sorry i asked. It was a genuine question. Still lesson learnt. 

ETA. Thanks for editing your initial response to my genuine question to your poorly worded post. 

Edited May 15, 2017 by rusty69

[lulu fish]

18 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

 It would be possible to allow financial and similar communications to banks, building societies etc be fully encrypted, but person to person being easy to open.  

That would be impossible to implement.  

[Chewbacka]

1 minute ago, lulu fish said:

That would be impossible to implement.  

No it wouldn't, but it would require the full co operation of the carrier such as skype, imessage etc, which they will not give without being forced by law.

[hounddog]

4 minutes ago, lulu fish said:

That would be impossible to implement.  

It's OK, if you've done nothing wrong you've got nothing to hide.
 

[lulu fish]

4 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

No it wouldn't, but it would require the full co operation of the carrier such as skype, imessage etc, which they will not give without being forced by law.

But then the bad people would just use another carrier that isn't compromised, or send the encrypted messages directly to each other. There is no way of enforcing a full ban on encrypted communications between individuals.  

[Machpoint005]

On 13/05/2017 at 09:47, WotEver said:

If you're referring to the one that hit over the last couple of days then yes, it's only built to attack unprotected MS systems which haven't installed all the security updates and/or don't have any decent AV software. I

Let's not forget this, before we all go off on one against Microsoft.

Not having up to date AV software is like leaving your car unlocked with the keys in the ignition. It shouldn't be a problem, but sooner or later it will be. 

[Chewbacka]

5 minutes ago, lulu fish said:

But then the bad people would just use another carrier that isn't compromised, or send the encrypted messages directly to each other. There is no way of enforcing a full ban on encrypted communications between individuals.  

True, but you can make it more difficult.  For example carries could be instructed to not deliver encrypted comms, GCHQ when finding encrypted coms would know something untoward was going on, and then the sender would be order to de encrypt the message. If they refused it would be a criminal offence, can't send anymore encrypted messages from prison........

[Dave Payne]

Used to get sick and tired of telling people i worked with, when i was IT administrator, always let the pc install any updates from MS it wants to, the amount of people that say i dont like MS and i dont let them update my pc, crazy!