Hacker News Reader

Comment by Melatonic | Hacker News Reader

The best anti malware on any version of windows has always been to make your default account you use everyday a non admin account.

You also need to create a separate account (can just be a local account) that is a full administrator. Make sure you use a different password.

Anytime you need to install something or run powershell/CMD as admin it will popup and ask for the separate login of the admin account. This is basically the default of how Linux works (sudo). It's also how any competent professional IT department will run windows.

If an admin elevation popup happens when you haven't triggered it then you probably know something is wrong. And most malware will not be able to install.

Another benefit is that you can use a relatively normal (but obviously not too short) password for your regular account and then have something much more complicated for the admin login. This is especially great on something like "Grandmas PC" or anyone who is at higher risk of clicking on the wrong thing.

View on HN

> If an admin elevation popup happens when you haven't triggered it then you probably know something is wrong. And most malware will not be able to install.

Malware can still do a lot without "installation". Running as an unprivileged user, it can still do anything to/with the filesystem that the user would be able to do, and will (on most normal setups) be able to make outbound Internet connections without limitation. In short, these kinds of privileges don't protect against data exfiltration, ransomware operating on the user's important data files, simple vandalism....

This is true but defense is a multi layered approach and even the built in Microsoft stuff (like Defender AV) have massively improved.

I would argue most malware comes down to uneducated users doing the wrong thing - but that's a whole different can of worms :-)

> I would argue most malware comes down to uneducated users doing the wrong thing

This feels unnecessarily harsh. Those users are the victims of criminal activity. The protective controls could be a lot better.

Windows doesn't offer immutable local file versions to protect against ransomware running as a non-privileged user. It doesn't offer any protection if a single application suddenly starts to overwrite huge amounts of data.

Instead they choose to try and shove OneDrive down our throats as the only answer to ransomware protection.

As someone working in infosec for a largish 2000 seat organisation - it's honestly not inaccurate. No matter how much accessible information security training we try to provide and the EDR controls we implement, >95% of our incidents involve an end-user following (sometimes extremely obvious) phishing links. And contrary to what you've said, Windows Defender (in conjunction with Airlock) has actually saved us from ransomware attacks.

Where I work has recently implemented Airlock and my laptop feels a lot less responsive since. I'm aware of the whole security trade-off, just wondering how noticeable it has been in your organisation, if at all?

Having said that, two things worth considering in my case:

1. My laptop is relatively old and, I think, overdue for replacement (8GB RAM, really?)

2. Windows Defender + Airlock + CrowdStrike + Netskope + Nessus seems an expectedly heavy load on a system

Not sure the exact combination of internal security nonsense used, but my corporate laptop idles at a good 20% cpu utilization. It would not surprise me at all to know that the products are stepping over themselves and scanning each other. Double plus ungood is that any programming tool I use seemingly gets extra scrutiny and can take 10x as long as I know it would on a non-compromised Linux machine.

> And contrary to what you've said, Windows Defender (in conjunction with Airlock)

"Contrary to what I've said" while you add in an extra third party product that I didn't mention.

> No matter how much accessible information security training we try to provide and the EDR controls we implement, >95% of our incidents involve an end-user following (sometimes extremely obvious) phishing links.

That just shows that security training is insufficient and admins need to design their systems and networks to account for that fact. Clicking links is part of everybody's job and should not pose a risk to your organization. Enable 2FA for everything exposed to the internet to mitigate phished credentials.

Stop trying to fix the user: https://www.schneier.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Stop-Try...

If an entire company can be paralyzed by tricking a single employee it's a process issue. Just like how wiring out $100,000 same day on the order of a single employee should be blocked by internal controls.

Isn't "Controlled folder access" part of that protection? Also restore points?

>Isn't "Controlled folder access" part of that protection?

Difficult to be effective when it's disabled by default.

>Also restore points?

By using System Restore, you can undo these changes without affecting your personal files

https://support.microsoft.com/en-au/windows/system-restore-a...

> without affecting your personal files

Thus System

> Difficult to be effective when it's disabled by default

The initial goalpost was lack of any protection / no alternatives to onedrive

> Thus System

What other "restore point" functionality does Windows offer by default?

> The initial goalpost was lack of any protection / no alternatives to onedrive

The context was "uneducated users"; they're unlikely to know they could enable controlled access.

They're further unlikely to be able to handle the application problems it introduces such as games having problems saving their state which why it's disabled by default.

So you want to make their lives much harder with two passwords for no good reason? Also, those uneducated users will simply enter the admin password when prompted

It's still a big win because it prevents subverting the underlying system. Logs still tell the truth. Security software keeps running. The damage can be inspected with the operating system's tools.

It's still "the length of the street" better than having malware installed as root/admin. Malware in userspace is much easier to both detect and remove for the simple fact it cannot embed itself that deeply into the system (barring nation states leveraging zero days, but that's a fee levels above 'regular consumer' advice).

This method has saved me (my parents) more than a couple of times.

> The best anti malware on any version of windows has always been to make your default account you use everyday a non admin account.

In the early 2000s up thru about 2012 I'd agree with you. Post-Vista malware adapted to UAC and now all malware works well as a normal user. Any data your normal user can access (local or on a remote CIFS server) is fair game for ransomware. Limiting administrator rights doesn't do anything to prevent the malware from getting at your data.

Persistence has moved to per-user, non-Administrator, too. Of course, all the various quasi-malicious customized versions of Chrome that end users inevitably install when they go searching for software to end-run their IT departments operates the same way.

I do think your daily driver Windows users shouldn't have administrator rights. It just isn't going to help much with malware.

I use physically separate boxes for my most sensitive activities (banking, mainly) but you could do nearly as well having separate non-admin Windows logons and compartmentalize your access to data you don't want ransomed. Isolation between different user accounts on Windows is actually fairly good. Just limit the common data the accounts can access.

Personally I've always wanted to use Qubes (and stop using physically separate machines) but I haven't taken them time to learn their contrivances.

Edit: I should have said "quasi-malicious customized versions of Chromium", not Chrome.

What are these "quasi-malicious customized versions of Chrome" you're referring to?

Edge? (joking)

Confused by that as well - what version of chrome can be installed without admin?

It cannot. There are malicious third parties who have made distributions of Chromium that are fully functional browsers, installing in the user's AppData folder w/o Administrator rights, that have additional "functionality" like exfiltrating browsing history or displaying extra t

This is really what any Electron-based app is. It's just Chromium running out of the AppData folder. There's a whole ecosystem of "shadow IT" software that installs out of the AppData folder, meant to end-run IT and central control, that functions great w/o Administrator rights.

I'm not doubting that there are malicious third parties distributing them, but Google themselves delivers Chromium that way:

https://download-chromium.appspot.com/

It's linked from the main chromium site:

https://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/download-chromium/

I thought that was a pretty common pattern now for a variety of software tools. Was pretty sure that Chrome + Firefox did not need administrator privileges to be available to a user.

This one is usually ok? https://chromium.woolyss.com/ It's sort of like official unofficial download place.

Edit: I should have said "Chromium", not Chrome. They are repackages of Chromium, usually with functionality to send browsing activity to a third party.

"Wave Browser" is the common one that comes to mind immediately. I have several flagged in the "endpoint security" software I support, though.

The workflow is: (1) User wants some software functionality they don't have, (2) they search-engine using keywords like "convert Word to PDF", (3) they find a program that promises to do the thing they want, (4) they download it and click thru any warnings because they "want the thing", and (5) they end up with persistent per-user malware installed in their "AppData" folder.

It will help stop the spread quite a bit however (even if it can access user local data). There's a reason escalation path attacks are still the gold standard (start small and move up).

You can also run something like applocker and whitelist all the apps you use.

Also instead of separate physical boxes why not just use a VM ?

> It will help stop the spread quite a bit however (even if it can access user local data).

User's should be running limited user accounts for daily-driver Windows machines.

Having said that, today's attacks are all about the data. It's all about exfil/ransomware/blackmail because there's money to be had there. On an individual home user PC there's no lateral movement or bigger targets to attack.

I hate to invoke xkcd, but it's true: https://xkcd.com/1200/

> You can also run something like applocker and whitelist all the apps you use.

That's a bit overkill for a personal machine and it won't be licensed for AppLocker anyway.

AppLocker is also a gigantic pain-in-the-ass on corporate machines. My experience with configuring AppLocker for anything other than very task-specific computers is that it's a huge and unending ordeal of whitelisting, trying again, whitelisting more, trying again. Wash, rinse, get complaints from end users, repeat.

> Also instead of separate physical boxes why not just use a VM ?

Pragmatism. I have a bunch of extra low-spec laptops laying around. My machines are, for the most part, cast-off Customer garbage. I haven't actually spent money on reasonable machine since about 2015. >smile<

> Also instead of separate physical boxes why not just use a VM ?

>Pragmatism. I have a bunch of extra low-spec laptops laying around. My machines are, for the most part, cast-off Customer garbage. I haven't actually spent money on reasonable machine since about 2015. >smile<

But you either need to setup a secure tunnel on each one, or lose access anytime you are away from home.

> But you either need to setup a secure tunnel on each one, or lose access anytime you are away from home.

Mostly isn't a problem for me. On the off chance I'd need the banking remotely I'd just take it with me. Mostly I don't do the sensitive stuff remotely and I rarely travel anymore.

Like I said in the parent post, I should be using Qubes. I'm just lazy.

It sounds like you just described what User Account Control (UAC) has been doing since Windows Vista (2006).

There are UAC bypasses. Microsoft has repeatedly stated that UAC isn't actually a security boundary. It's better to run a daily driver account as a limited user and only elevate when you overtly need it. (It's even better to use a separate login, as opposed to "Run As...)

Aren't most UAC bypasses relying on the fact that UAC by default isn't "full sudo"mode - i.e. it allows certain things without prompting?

Exactly - UAC is like a poor man's Sudo and I never really got the point of it. There is a reason so many people tried to disable it.

Daily driver as limited user should be the windows default even if it makes use ability more confusing.

Usually, private individuals are not the target of ransomware attacks by organized criminals. Companies often have to pay a lot more money to get their data back. The Petya ransomware is a good example of this.

Nevertheless, when you are on any machine as an intruder and have normal user rights, you can still actively search the machine and network for admin accounts and steal sessions. The ultimate goal is to gain Domain Admin rights.

Besides that, it is not necessary to have admin rights to delete and encrypt data or to run and hide software.

There are also many ways, besides stealing sessions, to gain admin rights, such as through unpatched software, inappropriate user rights, zero-day exploits, and social engineering.

A common way to get users to install malware or ransomware is to bundle it with useful software that the user wants to install.

The best anti malware on any version of windows has always been to not run windows.

We're all very impressed that you're such a 1337 h4x0r that you run Arch Linux and not Windo$e.

and

https://blog.sekoia.io/helldown-ransomware-an-overview-of-th...

I don't see how those links are relevant. Nobody claimed there is no malware on linux.

However the feature and culture of software distribution very much makes it safer. The overwhelming majority of malware gets distributed over ads from websites or search results. Package manager prominently used by all linux distros remove that attack vector or at the very least minimize it.

Ofc it does not prevent somebody from still executing random binaries from the internet if they really want to, nothing does.

I wouldn't be surprised if attackers started leveraging Wine for not going through the hassle of cross-compiling for different operating systems

Unfortunately a lot of modern software triggers UAC popups now. Games (for anticheat and/or network connectivity), development tools (for network connectivity or debugging), updaters for stuff that live-updates like Electron apps, etc.

Its easy to reinstall the OS. Its a lot more damaging if you lose your childs birthday photos, tax documents and anything you actually care about. This is where the entire PC security fiasco breaks down, since I want my docs directory protected FROM any system installed app/driver. I want an OS that asks for permission when accessing doc directory.

https://xkcd.com/1200/

It feels bad to post a link-only response but I really don't have anything to add to it. On a system used by multiple persons, sure, you help prevent that a compromise on sister's account immediately impacts mom's and dad's accounts, but that qualification isn't in the comment and probably most computers that HN readers use are single user. Or on a server, dropping privileges speaks for itself. But if you're on a desktop and you do online banking in your browser and also open email attachments on that computer... Not being admin would only help clean up the situation without needing to make a live boot (namely, you could theoretically trust the admin user and switch to that) but this isn't recommended practice anyway if you're not a malware specialist and can make sure it is fully gone. I cannot think of any situation where a single user desktop system benefits from admin privilege separation

So basically, what the comic conveys

> The best anti malware

Not being admin doesn't prevent malware from running and gaining persistence within your user account...

So the mum or grandpa should also use an admin account to execute the file they just downloaded?

They need this access to be able to use their computer, but even if they don't manage their own computer... maybe read the above comment and then let me know what I've overlooked rather than me repeating the whole thing

Most malware I've commonly seen on individuals computers (like the grandma example) comes about when they want to install something and use and installer that has it bundled with legit software. Or they visit a site that's a shady copy of a legit one.

LPEs exist. In linux world, you get tons of new LPEs every week. On windows, significantly harder

This is good advice, but it will not protect you against any malware that has been written in the last 10 years.

Stealer frameworks and dropper frameworks have implemented a lot of bypasses. From using other installed programs (lolbins / gtfobins etc) to using embedded scripting engines to do their bidding up until just reusing signed and installed default drivers to execute their payloads. A lot of drivers have sideloading and execution capabilities due to how the $igning process in Microsoft is constructed.

Additionally, nobody needs "root" access to do anything these days, this is just plain wrong assumption. Most malware will go for your browser profiles which are readable by your user (duh), so a separate privilege escalation exploit avoiding user account won't help you there either.

It's much better to sandbox your applications as good as possible. Even just using firejail profiles will go a long way, especially in regards to electron apps or apps that have remote update and plugin installation capabilities (e.g. discord, slack and the like).

Please, drop some malware binaries through ghidra or other tools before you give advice like this. You might be part of survivor's bias without realizing it.

Or you know... just use Linux

I've got a snap installed, I think it's for the google command line tools. It will quite often at random times pop up a window in KDE asking for the admin password, and there is nothing in that window that tells me what or why the admin password is needed.

Decided it was a risk to just be typing the admin password whenever a random popup asked me to, so disabled all snap automatic updates.

Every couple of years I give daily driving Linux a try. I still find that old joke about "Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing" to be quite apt.

I switched to Ubuntu "skinned" with Omakub a few months ago. Never looked back. Work with Windows on my work machine and use my *nix box as my daily dev driver and machine for surfing the net, doing emails and documents. I actually use it for nearly everything except vector graphics/dtp & images, as I am still too used to the affinity suite.

Will try out Omarchy just for the fun of it - not that I expect it to become my daily driver.

But - depending on your needs - I think Linux can be on par (for me it is way better, longer battery life, better configuration, better tools, smoother workflows, but YMMV).

Please don't use that horrible script. It makes no sense to install such bloatware on top of an already bloated distro, which adds unnecessary attack surface. I would recommend fedora or arch, both are perfect for beginners with minimal bloat

Do you mind elaborating a bit on what went wrong? Like, were you installing on a recent MacBook, or something else not well supported? In my experience, installing and running a popular distro is absolute cake. Easier than Windows, even, since you aren’t forced to create cloud accounts and answer a million privacy questions; you basically install then boot right into your new desktop.

Used it on various devices. A Dell laptop (with power switching between dedicated and iGPU, what a nightmare that was for Linux display drivers), a desktop I built myself, a Raspberry Pi running RPi OS.

I find most things fine in Linux and I'm fairly comfortable with the terminal. However it's the 10% or so of things that are very cumbersome in Linux but instant in Windows/Mac that drive me away.

Example: There is no Google Drive client for Linux. Spend an hour dorking around in rclone and get it set up and working with bidirectional sync. The token still expires weekly and needs to be renewed. Yeah, I get a potential solution is "don't use Google Drive" but the little projects to get my current workflow functioning on Linux, or change my workflow to fit Linux's constraints, end up adding up into a bunch of wasted time.

>There is no Google Drive client for Linux

What? Google accounts have been a thing in Gnome for years. You have Google Drive access right in Nautilus.

Not for ARM.

If you use a distro built on GNOME, ARM or not does not matter

Almost all distros have an ARM version. KDE can also handle online services such as google drive. There are also a couple of other projects to deal with it if you don't like KDE or Gnome. What you claim is trivially untrue.

Have you tried just using it in browser?

The point is that Linux is not worse it is just different. What you do on Windows or iOS will not be the same as on Linux. How you adapt and if you want to is the point.

I am horribly ineffective on Windows even if I am forced to use it. The only reason for me to use it is to play multiplayer games though, and it is the default install on new laptops before installing Linux. So Windows sucks because it does not have what I need, and I see no reasons to change my ways to Windows.

But if this is your first time using Windows or Mac, you will also need time to get used to it. I've tried using a Mac, and so far I'm not used to it. :)

Every few years someone forces me to use Windows and I find that my data is apparently worth nothing since it being one giant anti-pattern wastes my time.

I agree, I switched to Mac last fall with the incessant Windows 10 popups that my CPU is not supported and I can't upgrade to Windows 11, so buy a new PC chump or you'll be EOL! Okay, I bought a new PC Mr. Nadella, it just doesn't run Windows.

That ended up being the last straw in a long line of complaints with data privacy and things being forced on me in Windows. Somehow that stupid Bing toolbar would constantly re-enable itself and re-appear on my desktop after every update despite being disabled everywhere I could find a setting for...

I wasn't very happy with Apple's bizarre UI or out of date libraries.

The easiest way to make an OS with ideal support on one platform is to only support Apple's hardware instead of the PC cosmos, so I will be interested if Asahi getting the relatively little resources it needs will gradually make it the least waste of time choice to use Linux on Apple hardware.

I don't find it to be that way at all. I've used Debian as my daily driver for almost 10 years and I spend maybe... 30 minutes per year dealing with setup and configuration and stuff?

Much less than I needed to back when I mainly used Windows.

Sure, there's a learning curve. But Windows has a learning curve too, you just already climbed that hill.

Judging from the rest of the thread, they were referring to setup and configuration. For the most part, I consider this to be one of the strengths of Linux.

On the other hand, the operating system is the means rather than the end to most people. If a person is transitioning from Windows to Linux, they will probably have a substantial number of new programs to learn in the process. That is going to factor into most people's impressions of the operating system as a whole.

I don't know what your use case is, so what I'm about to say may not be relevant.

When you're making the transition from one operating system to another, there is going to be an investment of time. It doesn't matter whether you are moving from Windows to Linux or from Linux to Windows. When it comes to getting things done, each operating system is going to have its own strengths and weaknesses. Our attention is going to be drawn towards the weaknesses of what we are trying out because that is what we are going to spend the most time addressing. Our attention is going to drift away from the weaknesses of what we are familiar with since we have long since learned to circumvent or ignore them.

What I am suggesting is that I would spend as much time learning how to daily drive Windows as you would learning how to daily drive Linux. Unfortunately, I cannot draw upon quips like "Windows is only free if your time is worth nothing" since Windows is not free. I have a copy of Windows 11 Professional that cost significantly more than any given component of the computer it runs on.

I would recommend giving Linux Mint a try. It's very newbie friendly with a desktop like environment of Windows, automatic backup creation, and a store to install pretty much any software you need from. I got my elderly parents to try it & they were both able to figure it out quite quickly!

I also hear good things about ZorinOS as it's built as a full fledged Windows alternative with built-in WINE to run native Windows apps in

You can play with them both at this link without having to install anything:

https://distrosea.com/

There's nothing magical about the Linux security architecture, when it comes to malware, aside from abysmal Linux market share. If it were popular it would be targeted.

That's not to say there's no value. It's a case of security by obscurity, at best. The Unix security model is much more simplistic than Windows NT. Everybody disables SELinux so there's no meaningful capabilities functionality.

Assuming you actually do run malware, all your user account's data on a Linux machine ends up being just as vulnerable to exfil or ransom as if you're running Windows as a limited user.

"Everybody disables SELinux"

That implies you are probably using a RH jobbie. With no working whatsover, I assert that many more Linux desktops will be rocking apparmor or no kernel security module.

Oh and no I don't disable SELinux, except as a quick check to see if that is what is causing issues. Obviously I'm not everyone, but I am someone.

I haven't used desktop Linux in a number of years, but back when I did I'd see disabling SELinux was a common recommendation. I hope things are getting better.

On the Linux application hosting front the majority of vendor-supported garbage I have the displeasure of supporting that runs outside of Docker disables SELinux as a matter of course.

I haven't daily driven anything but Linux for 15 years or more. I remember when Xorg was the new kid and XFree86 could destroy your CRT (or so "they" said - I never managed it!) Mind you I also remember #make config taking about 20 minutes.

Advice advocating disabling selinux is very similar to SFC /SCANNOW or "turn off your anti virus". As soon as you see advice like that you do have to wonder at the motive.

A quick broad-brush approach to troubleshooting is fine and could be considered the first stage before a binary search is used to get to the real problem. So you make things safe first and then you switch off something like selinux. Does that work? If yes, then you switch it back on and then do your search within selinux and perhaps bother with reading logs.

You obviously have to support a lot of cough enterprise ... RH based stuff or perhaps Oracle's sufferings.

If you can, call someone's bluff: Insist on a standard. PCI DSS is involved as soon as a payment card is involved - that will soon sort things out. In the UK, we have Cyber Essentials and the plus form. Non UK Europe also has similar standards. The US will have Freedom versions of any standards and the rest of the world will have theirs.

Go in with standards if you can. As soon as you permanently switch off a security mechanism you have failed (yourself and your customer).

Good luck mate.

On Linux one typically runs third-party (not coming from official repositories) software in a sandbox which is a great pain (good luck sandboxing an Electron app) but at least possible. Unless you own exploits to bypass kernel restrictions you cannot do much.

Right tool for the job. Linux for deploying stuff to, Linux or mac for working on the stuff you’ll deploy. Windows for games and everyday use. They’re all superior in their category and it’s too obvious to spend time arguing about.

You don't need Windows for games since ages. Steam games run on Linux.

Not really if you ever tried. Barely playing music, games obviously don’t work if you ever tried playing games. (hint, game x not beeing terrible doesen’t mean ”it works”). like I said at the start this is fairly obvious.

I play AAA games on steam deck running stock steam OS. It's rock solid. Look at the sales of steam deck alone, it's quite successful

You can game on Linux for many years now. Windows is mostly mandatory if you play multiplayer games with anticheat

yea pong working on linux doesen’t equal to gaming working on linux. Most games won’t start or play worse.

ive been playing elden ring fantastically on the steam deck. its the game of the year from a couple years back

You have been living under a rock. Wine and proton are significantly faster than native windows. With valve's partnership with Archlinux last year, it's going to get even better

You’re either trolling or simply unaware but Steam and Proton allows you to run quite a bit of the Steam library on Linux with good performance.

Windows is bad for everyday use because it sends all your data to Microsoft, you need to get a cloud account and can get banned from your system at any moment, it can install changes at any time etc. So basically you get humiliated every time you use your computer.

Windows is good for work though because if it starts updating during the work day, or breaks, you can do nothing and still get paid. And if it leaks your company data, it is not your problem also.

Linux ransomware does not require root.

There are many reasons someone might have to use Windows. I have a Windows box because a number of games I play don’t support Linux, even with WINE and Proton.

I found that ProtonDB is quite helpful in figuring out how many games will or won’t run well: https://www.protondb.com/

You can even log in with Steam and get the summary for your exact library, for anyone curious.

It’s fine for a casual single player game. I’ve played rimworld on Linux mint. But league? Fortnite? Cod? Battlefield?

I am very aware of which games don't work with Proton, which is why I know I need a windows machine.

> Or you know... just use Linux

...where namespaces provide excellent technology for hiding malware making linux one of the best platforms to turn into a evil host.

Do they? Processes inside a namespace still are visible from the top level namespace.

Make sure to never do

  curl example.com/easyscript.sh | sudo bash

Reply on news.ycombinator.com