Experts Only: Time to Ditch the Antivirus?
By Bill Brenner
,
CSO
, 06/24/2009
- Share/Email
- Tweet This
- Print
To the average IT security practitioner, the idea of disabling antivirus on new machines might seem blasphemous. After all,
weren't we all told in IT Security 101 that everyone needs AV to keep the malware and data thieves at bay?
Perhaps, but for some who moved beyond IT Security 101 eons ago, AV is more than simply obsolete. It's an obstacle to a more
perfect defense. And so they've chosen to disable it.
Among those who feel that way is David Litchfield, a leading database security expert who has authored such books as "Oracle
Forensics," the "Oracle Hacker's Handbook," the "Database Hacker's Handbook" and "SQL Server Security." [Related: Researcher Finds New Way to Hack Oracle Database]
Like the media players and toolbars he also chooses to disable, such as Real Player, Adobe Acrobat/Flash and toolbars from Google and Yahoo, Litchfield simply doesn't trust the AV programs out there.
"As an experienced security guy, I have no faith in most of the AV packages out there because they're completely reactive,
offer little advance protection, massively increase the attack surface and have a long history of vulnerable ActiveX controls,"
Litchfield says. "I've never used AV software and I've never once been infected with a virus."
For Rich Mogull, former Gartner analyst and founder of security consultancy Securosis, it's not simply a matter of distrusting
AV. It's just that security practitioners who have been in the game as long as he has have found better controls that make
AV obsolete.
"I don't use AV on most of my systems, and most high-level security types use only limited AV," he said.
Mogull believes AV is quite useful at the e-mail gateway/provider level, and he does have AV on a Windows XP VM (virtual machine)
left over from his last job. But there's no AV to be found on his Mac, or on his Vista VM. He points out that he uses "a lot"
of other controls that provide him with adequate security, including limited Web browsing, maximum security in the browser,
e-mail filtering and other lock-downs on the system.
All that said, Litchfield and Mogull agree this isn't something the security novice should be doing. "Knowing what is and
what isn't safe to do on a computer is 90 percent of the battle," Litchfield said.
Ken Pfeil, executive director and head of information security for the Americas Region at financial services company WestLB
AG, said he can see both sides of the argument.
"Litchfield is right in a lot of respects. AV and personal firewalls are pretty much useless unless you are the average end
user," he said. However, he also noted that "It still doesn't matter when it comes down to policy in the corporate world because
you can't effectively enforce two different sets of standards." In other words, in the enterprise setting, it's AV for everyone.
And Pfeil thinks that's okay, noting that even experienced race car drivers wear their seatbelt even though the odds are slim
that an accident will happen on their way to the store.
Zach Lanier, senior network security analyst at Harvard Business School, noted the debate over AV effectiveness isn't new,
but the past few years have been increasingly difficult for traditional approaches to malware protection. Most of the current
AV options lag behind in updates, have detection engines that are trivial to bypass, and sometimes are themselves vulnerable,
he said. He also considers himself savvy enough to skip antivirus on his own systems in favor of other security options like
sandboxing and mandatory access control.
Comments (13)
AV stops OLD malware, Users need something to block NEW malwareBy Eirik on June 25, 2009, 12:49 pmTraditional AV products rely on signatures, which are like fingerprints. So, they only stop malware that has been previously arrested and "booked". Cyber criminals...
Reply | Read entire comment
Other protectionBy Anonymous on June 25, 2009, 4:58 pmWhile I basically agree, I'd still probably leave AV running if from a major player, but he's right. Most companies do a poor job of IDS and IPS which can really...
Reply | Read entire comment
MAC and Linux usersBy Anonymous on June 25, 2009, 6:01 pmThis article discribes exactly an attitude and why Mac & Linux machines on the LAN are the biggest security threat to the Windows enviroment. These users don't scan...
Reply | Read entire comment
Antivirus is absolutely mandatoryBy Anonymous on June 25, 2009, 6:59 pmI believe the "experts" above are probably the leading bot's sending out all the virri that's hitting everyone else. Can you explain how you can say you've never...
Reply | Read entire comment
Mac and Linux usersBy Freetulistenn on June 25, 2009, 8:32 pmAnd we Mac and Linux users should use protection for your benefit? And put overheads on our systems? Naaah. You use vulnerable machines, you use protection. The...
Reply | Read entire comment
MAC and Linux usersBy Anonymous on June 26, 2009, 7:27 amExactly, your propensity for malware propagation prove the need for such to not only be located on every 'other' desktop but more importantly at the domain perimeter...
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments