# 98% Windows PCs at risk



## ThinkFree (Dec 5, 2008)

Virtually all Windows computers (more than 98 per cent) are running at least one unpatched application, and nearly half contain 11 or
more programmes at risk from attack, are the alarming revelations of the Copenhagen-based security company Secunia.

In the study, Secunia APS says that 98.1 per cent of the PCs on which its Personal Software Inspector (PSI) utility was installed over the last week have one or more applications that have security updates available for downloading. Only 1.9 per cent of Windows systems that ran the PSI utility for the first time had no out-of-date programmes.

The data gathered from 20,000 users showed that about a third of the systems ran a vulnerable version of five or fewer programmes, while nearly half of the machines ran 11 or more insecure applications.

The company considered a programme “insecure” if a newer version -- correcting at least one security flaw -- was available but not installed on the user's system.

PSI works by scanning Windows systems for installed applications and checking to see if the most current versions of those applications are installed. If not, the programme makes a note and then provides a link to the updated version. To gather its numbers, Secunia said that it tracked the results of each user's first PSI scan. 

Source: *infotech.indiatimes.com/News/98_Windows_PCs_at_risk/articleshow/3797286.cms


----------



## debsuvra (Dec 6, 2008)

hmmm... I used PSI once and the only unpatched, really-at-risk application it found was PSI itself.


----------



## Vishal Patil (Dec 6, 2008)

Leave alone that application, PC's with Windows OS are always at risk.

may be 99.9% of PC's running windows are at risk. The remaining 0.1% are not used at all


----------



## zyberboy (Dec 6, 2008)

^its a myth, viruses are over hyped


----------



## Faun (Dec 6, 2008)

^^until you are the victim


----------



## j_h (Dec 7, 2008)

zyberboy said:


> ^its a myth, viruses are over hyped


I agree with you. If you are careful, then you will not get a virus easily. 
one of the problem of Viruses in Windows is that most windows users are inexperienced users who click on anything.


----------



## Vishal Patil (Dec 7, 2008)

the other problem is with the OS itself which is so much vulnerable to viruses because of the autorun.
so clicking is not the only source of viruses.


----------



## zyberboy (Dec 7, 2008)

^autorun can be disabled easily.


----------



## indranilmaulik (Dec 10, 2008)

i am using windows since 3.1

not a single incident in my pcs till date.


----------



## JojoTheDragon (Dec 10, 2008)

I have been able to keep my vista safe for more than 6months now by not viewing *ahem* sites.


----------



## alexanderthegreat (Dec 10, 2008)

Unpatched applications are not a threat if you keep them away from modifications! Keep all unpatched applications guarded by the firewall! Scan all removable media before using, worship your antivirus(this NEEDS to be updated!) and no virus will ever touch you! Viruses can only be dangerous if this is the case:-
*www.myspacespells.com/files/thumbs/4b355de2906c.jpg
PEBKAC
Remember, viruses are NOT immortal(yet!). They are only as intelligent as much as you are a dolt! (So get a doltameter!)

I've only faced virus problems once... that was back when I was using Symantec AV 2004!


----------



## thewisecrab (Dec 10, 2008)

PEBKAC in this case.
I doubt whether users will face serious threats from unpatched apps, unless of course they are really n00bish.


----------



## SunnyChahal (Dec 10, 2008)

Gosh,my Vista PC has been free from viruses for 5 months now coz I don't use it much


----------



## hsr (Dec 11, 2008)

What can a virus attack do?
Corrupt HD
Format it
Reformat  it
Loose sectors
OMG install windows!
Loose sectors again
Reformat
Corrupt Drive
Buy new drive .....

LAWL


----------



## Garbage (Dec 11, 2008)

hari_sanker_r said:


> What can a virus attack do?
> Corrupt HD
> Format it
> Reformat  it
> ...


and post it here...


----------



## victor_rambo (Dec 11, 2008)

Most of these surveys bring huge number of possibilites that are largely theoretical. Its just a filler for websites that feature such pointless news. I(or anyone) can successfully prove that every Linux, Mac, Windows, or any other OS user is always at risk. So does it add any value to anybody's computing or life for that matter?


----------



## Kl@w-24 (Dec 11, 2008)

hari_sanker_r said:


> Loose sectors



WTF is a 'loose sector'???


----------



## Faun (Dec 11, 2008)

^^lol
really bad !


----------



## hsr (Dec 11, 2008)

loose = mad and loose sectors = mad sectors, lawl, owned


----------



## Kl@w-24 (Dec 11, 2008)

hari_sanker_r said:


> loose = mad and loose sectors = mad sectors, lawl, owned



Umm... Yeah... Whatever...


----------



## amitash (Dec 14, 2008)

I have never had a "major" virus attack where reinstallation of the OS is required...was in a spot of bother in vista once..the "shut down" and "restart" buttons were disabled but running hijackthis and carefully eliminating the bad process fixed it...Since then ive had kaspersky and no virus attacks at all


----------



## mickiedaniels (Feb 2, 2009)

I have never had problems with my OS, and it has been 6 months! I think the key is to be careful and pay attention to what you are clicking!]


----------



## NucleusKore (Feb 2, 2009)

Nothing new


----------



## damngoodman999 (Feb 2, 2009)

i should say that GAMES should be developed for linux , linux should be more enhanced ,it is an open source the viruses can be easily determined and hacking free .

threat level is very less in linux


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Feb 2, 2009)

Pebkac


----------



## iMav (Feb 2, 2009)

Why are the other 2% not at risk?


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Feb 2, 2009)

^^Because they use their brains.


----------



## anuvrat_parashar (Feb 3, 2009)

the other two percent computers are either not used or not connected to the internet.

and ofcource PEBKAC is a major cause


----------



## Faun (Feb 3, 2009)

^^lolwut ? because they are the one hacking into other 98% nubs


----------



## tarey_g (Feb 3, 2009)

iMav said:


> Why are the other 2% not at risk?


Because they have the newest version of nero installled. 



> The company considered a programme “insecure” if a newer version -- correcting at least one security flaw -- was available but not installed on the user's system.



The survey itself is idiotic.


----------



## SunnyChahal (Feb 22, 2009)

^^
Lol!


----------



## Ecstasy (Feb 22, 2009)

Reported lol.


----------



## zyberboy (Feb 22, 2009)

^^^lol that sounds like a street sale


----------



## victor_rambo (Feb 22, 2009)

These survey companies can do anything and publish any idiotic headline to be noticed in the media.


----------



## aura (Feb 27, 2009)

well to me the figure of 98% is too overated.

Yes, I do agree that software updates matters very much but still that does not mean like a single uncommitted update can destroy your system.

Keep your Antivirus & Antispyware fully updated and you have a negligible change of a system crash.


----------



## gopi_vbboy (Feb 27, 2009)

Truth is 98% windows users dono how 2 use windows safely n efficiently


----------



## spironox (Mar 3, 2009)

my exp states that 

third party patches works better than Mfg's 

those 2% unpatched system are freq reinstalled bare bone pc used by Govt officials who type with single finger !


----------

