OK. So, you just bought a new computer. It still even has that brand-new-in-the-box / fresh-PC-smell.

And it's already got a virus.

Oh, did I mention it came that way straight from the factory?

That's exactly what the folks at Kaspersky Labs, makers of highly-rated, Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2009, discovered on a new netbook they just bought: a new netbook computer, straight from the factory with viruses.

Roel Schouwenberg discusses this in the Kaspersky Blog saying in the May 19, 2009, blog:

"The other day we bought a brand new M&A; Companion Touch to test. After initial checks, the testing group contacted me since they suspected a malware infection. Could this be yet another example of a factory-infected device?"

As it turns out, their brand new M&A; Companion Touch had not one but three bits of malware of just about every type imaginable: worm, rootkit, and trojan.

After some digging, the Kaspersky specialist, "...was able to determine that these files had been present since February 2009, a long time before we got the netbook."

"This case shows once again that even brand new products can leave the factory infected.

Safeguarding against infected new devices is particularly difficult.

Doing an offline scan with an up to date security solution normally is the most effective solution.

As there will have been a time lapse between the device getting infected and you getting your hands on it, your security solution should have no problem detecting the malware."

That last sentence is one I took note of. Sure, it's no longer possible to trust brand new computers straight from the factory; however, it does mean that by installing antivirus software, you're likely to stop such malware in its tracks as the folks at Kaspersky have shown.

[Editor's Note: this isn't the first time we've seen factory-new products with viruses, we discussed the Samsung Digital Picture Frame virus last December.]

In case you thought things had settled down with Conficker, you're wrong.

Just because it's nearly two months after the official Conficker activiation date, and just because the main stream media isn't talking about it anymore, doesn't mean it's not a real threat.

In fact, Computerworld, one of our favorite resources for computer security news, brings word of it in this statistic: 50,000 computers/day are still being infected with Conficker. [Full details on it from them: here.]

We learned via Computerworld that Symantec, like us, made mention of the media hype dying down but Conficker still being alive and well, saying in a recent Conficker blog:

"Much of the media hype seems to have died down around Conficker/Downadup, but it is still out there spreading far and wide."

The folks at Symantec even include a world map of Conficker infections.

What this means is that the chances of getting infected by this virus/worm are just as bad as ever. Even if fully 50% of the Conficker worms are caught within a week that still means 175,000 new computers are being infected weekly.

At this point, having covered the Conficker worm (and about removing the Conficker worm) extensively here at our site, it should come as no surprise that this worm is no joke, but what's amazing to me is that after so much has been said about such malware that still so many people go without antivirus protection. Even without our coupons, getting the best antivirus / security software out there for Windows isn't that expensive.

Full sticker price of top-rated antivirus software like, VIPRE or BitDefender is under $30; with our coupons it's even less. Even if the *only* worm in the world were Conficker, which (obviously) it isn't, $30 seems like a small price to pay to avoid the problem altogether, and in the case of Conficker, it's clear, it's not going away anytime soon.

One of the places we keep an eye on here is US-CERT.gov, the United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team. Their crack team of computer commandos (read: geeks) keep a watchful eye on all things relating to computer security that might have effects at the national/international level.

We like their view of things because it tends to have a "Just the facts, ma'am," approach to security news. Rather than being a bunch of FUD spreading that sometimes tends to come from security software vendors.

One of the things we took note of was their posting yesterday about what's being called, Gumblar malware.

Typically we avoid long quotes because there's seldom that much worth quoting, but this one is worth citing in whole, so quoting their posting,

"US-CERT is aware of public reports of a malware exploit circulating. This is a drive-by-download exploit with multiple stages and is being referred to as Gumblar.

The first stage of this exploit attempts to compromise legitimate websites by injecting malicious code into them.

Reports indicate that these website infections occur primarily through stolen FTP credentials but may also be compromised through poor configuration settings, vulnerable web applications, etc.

The second stage of this exploit occurs when users visit a website compromised by Gumblar. Users who visit these compromised websites and have not applied updates for known PDF and Flash Player vulnerabilities may become infected with malware.

This malware may be used by attackers to monitor network traffic and obtain sensitive information, including FTP and login credentials, that can be used to conduct further exploits.

Additionally, this malware may also redirect Google search results for the infected user.

US-CERT encourages users and administrators to apply software updates in a timely manner and use up-to-date antivirus software to help mitigate the risks."

There are several noteworthy things in this posting that we felt warranted clarification to our newer readers:

What we also took note of in the article was that US-CERT says, "US-CERT encourages users and administrators to apply software updates in a timely manner and use up-to-date antivirus software to help mitigate the risks."

Huh.

Sure sounds like they're beating the same drum we do.

As you might imagine, we get a lot of email. Most of it is from really nice people all around the world looking for help choosing the best antivirus software for a new computer or are looking to upgrade antivirus software to a newer version.

Although it's asked a million different ways, one of the most common questions that comes from these emails is,

"Do I really need to upgrade my antivirus software or can I just keep getting new definitions?"

There should be no question in anyone's mind that the malware creators are constantly getting smarter and are making their viruses, worms, trojans, keyloggers, and the like more clever and harder to detect. In fact, an article in ZDNet talks about this very problem and that it's getting harder to detect viruses. The article cites, Konstantin Sapronov, one of the Kaspersky antivirus lab heads is paraphrased in the article, saying,

"new methods of infiltration have also rendered it nearly impossible for users to avoid infection, even if they are careful. Seemingly clean sites can also perform backend redirection to malware-ridden sites."

It's definitely a game of cat-and-mouse where the antivirus companies are always on the prowl looking for ways to refine their tools to make them smarter, faster, and more able. Likewise, the malware writers are constantly doing their best to avoid detection.

Do I Need to Upgrade Antivirus Software?

When considering whether to keep your existing software and extend your definition subscription or to purchase new antivirus software or upgrade versions, the buying decision can be boiled down to a few questions:

I came across an interesting find today from some of our peers at pcAuthority.com.au. They make a list--and a good one at that--of the Top 10 Worst Computer Viruses of all time.

Internet security tends to have a short memory once we're past a computer virus outbreak. We tend to breath a collective sigh of relief whether we dodged the problem altogether or finally got a virus cleaned up.

After that, we move on to other tasks and before we know it (especially if we weren't hit by a particular virus ourselves), we've forgotten how damaging a particular virus or worm was.

As I read through this list, I found myself nodding again and again and remembering some what dread these malware nasties caused for so many businesses and personal computer users.

 The things that stood out for me as I perused the list were:

1. There are three types of viruses:
   1. Those that cause damage intentionally.
   2. Those that cause damage unintentionally, i.e. mostly collateral damage/clean-up damage for those who have to take care of the mess
   3. Those that don't do much of anything and are really just irritating.
2. Even years later some viruses/worms/malware are still causing problems.
3. As viruses have grown in sophistication, an ounce of prevention is still worth a pound of cure.
   
   Put another way: look at the reviews we've put together at our homepage, www.pcAntivirusReviews.com, choose the software that's right for you, and you're much less likely to have issues.