Does being a security person really help you keep safe or more advanced than the average joe or jane?
What do you think ?
What do you think ?
Security Knowledge
- Thread starter ng4ever
- Start date
Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.
- Sep 8, 2019
- 461
Ill go with Sometimes, for example, does an experienced user who know what to look after know if they experience a drive-by attack? or an network attack? neither does the average joe, which is why having some sort of security product is important.
- Jan 8, 2011
- 22,361
- Dec 12, 2016
- 1,148
How so ?
They would test in a isolated environment the security products.
And would debug / fuzz to play with it.
But can't understand how it increases the risk ?
I voted yes. Due to being well aware of security, I realise the important of keeping my systems updated and know not to open random files (e.g. email attachments from unknown senders) and as a result I never get infected.
Yes and no. Those with an interest in cyber-security are probably less prone to falling victim to user-initiated infections (email, fake software updates, torrents, etc.), but are susceptible to overestimating their knowledge and believing themselves to be invulnerable, thus leading to poor decision making and potential infection.
truefacts
Level 1
- Jun 9, 2020
- 12
All the security experts I know keep their security very basic, very simple. And they say (and prove) that for most people very basic, very simple protects average joe and jane. Proof of this fact is that only a minority of all users get infected with only native Windows security. The notion that people need to use anything other than very simple, very basic is due to fear mongering marketing and a tiny fraction of all users who are paranoid. Threats are blown way out of proportion.
So the answer is "Nope."
Last edited:
- Sep 10, 2015
- 901
The advanced user can easily switch to Linux, but he also tends to run unknown programs no matter what OS he uses
Similar threads
