And if that's the case, they deserve to lose access to the internet (and get charged a ridiculously exorbitant fee for repair to boot).

debbie your comment is pretty ignorant, there was thousands of different ways a computer could have gotten infected by this, from emails to legit sites from home depot to nick.com and once infected nobody can tell that their computer has even been rerouted so most will lose their internet with no idea why

This cybercrime ring was taken down 8 months ago. The temporary servers were set up immediately and were supposed to be taken offline 4 months ago. There has been plenty of time for people to fix this problem at no cost and with minimal effort. If you unknowingly have malware that deep for that long and don't mitigate it, you deserve to lose your access!

so what you are saying, is if some poor little old lady clicked on a bad link or opened a email to become infected, she deserves to lose her internet connection, because she is not as computer savy as the great Debbie schinker (innocent people with limited computer skills do not deserve to lose their computer connections because you think you are above them)

Thanks Pad and Jean,
I am a bit savy with computers and I am on one daily. With that said, I just recently heard about this issue and made sure our computers were okay. I don't know who this Debbie Schinker is, and if she is someone from my area, I hope to never meet her. I am not fond of people who are heartless, and think they know everything, and have big mouths, but hot air coming out.

Teresa - on the contrary, there are several legitimate sites to use to find out if a rumor is real or just a hoax. SNOPES.COM is always a good place to start. Sophos is a good site, too (I follow their "naked security" page on FB.) And for something of this scope with this much publicity, even the FBI has info on how to know if you are infected and what do to if you are (http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/november/malware_110911/DNS-changer-malware.pdf). You are smart to be wary - and probably less likely to have an infected machine than most - but throwing up your hands and saying, "I'll take my chances" isn't going to solve your problem if you have one.

It takes 5 seconds to check and see if your computer is infected. It is preventable if you have BASIC 21st century computer literacy skills and it is fixable if you did somehow, unwittingly, end up infected. It's also been in the news for the better part of a year now. It is in no way whatsoever like having a heart defect.

well Debbie I guess everyone is not as great as you are, you can get off your pedistal anytime you want since nobody is impressed, You see Debbie the point that Kim made was a good one most people have no idea they have one of the rerouted systems until it will be too late (why would you fix something that is not broken)

yes Charley, It was nice that they posted the link for checking, SINCE WE ALL CANNOT BE AS SMART AS THE ALL KNOWING ALL WISE DEBBIE (gag)

no "quotes" are needed - debbie is her real name. and she'll take you to task if your's isn't. she's, indeed, a "joy" (quotes are needed to denote sarcasm).

what is funny is that Debbie only uses the TOS name complaint when she is on the short end of a discussion

here is debbie eating humble pie http://shutterbugschink.wordpress.com/2008/09/16/happy-birthday-to-me/

With but a few brief minutes in photoshop....

How is it a non issue that over 4 million people were affected by a crime?

It's clear that you didn't read anything other than what parts of this article from CNN you feel justify your snark. If you had read the references you might have saw the following things.

"The servers were supposed to be shut down in March, but hundreds of thousands remained infected. Nearly 211,000 computers worldwide (about 42,000 in the United States) still have the virus, according to the FBI's latest count on Monday. That's a large number, but it's a very small subset of the 1.6 billion PCs worldwide, of which an estimated 339 million are in the United States."

http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/06/technology/dnschanger/

1.6 billion computers were affected by a crime which you think is a non issue. To further put this into perspective and focus on just the computers in this country; the article states a total of 339 million US computers were affected. That's approximately 28 million more computers than there are people in the United States.

While you might think your #FirstWorldProblems is clever and decisive you are forgetting about a growing demographic of people that use their computers and their internet connectivity to make a living. While I will agree that most of those people are probably savvy enough not to get hit by something like this it doesn't diminish the fact that those who did are victims of a crime that you somehow feel they deserved.

Pad,

You (and others) continue to attribute positions and opinions to me that cannot be correctly inferred from my comments. I never said that the crime itself was a non-issue. I said it is a non-issue that the consortium which has been operating the replacement servers for 4 months is now turning them off.

Of course I read the entire article. In a comment I made two days ago, I referenced many of the facts you reiterated. Look for yourself, as my comment is still up there!

And despite your assumptions, I also never said people deserve to be victims of crime. I said that they deserve to lose their internet and pay an exorbitant fee for repairs if they a) had no precautions in place to avoid such malware, b) don't have the basic 21st century literacy skills to avoid it, and c) didn't bother, over the last 8 months, to spend 5 seconds to verify that they weren't a victim. This is especially true for people who rely on internet connectivity for a living (in which case, you should absolutely be more aware of such issues than the average "old lady" user).

By the way, my hashtag wasn't meant to be "snarky." It was meant to point out the relatively minor nature of the problem OF TURNING OFF THE SERVERS 8 MONTHS LATER (again, NOT the minor nature of the crime itself, which I never addressed) to those of you all hopped up over what you perceive as my "insensitivity."

There are larger, more important issues in the world, folks. But if it somehow makes you feel better about yourselves to get all indignant over a one-sentence comment I made on a local Patch story, I'm glad I could help ya!

Debbie here is where you go off base.....".I said that they deserve to lose their internet and pay an exorbitant fee for repairs if they a) had no precautions in place to avoid such malware" ....now debbie try to understand this, malware is not malware until it is spotted and definitions are written to prevent them (so if you are one of the first to go to an infected site) all your precautions are turned off and in minutes your entire internet protocols can be rewritten ....while you sleep you have lost control of your computer ....now how can that be called your fault

Tom - even on the very, VERY slight chance that the scenario you described would actually happen (you are the very FIRST one to go to a site infected by malware that no one has EVER seen before), having reputable malware software in place would likely have identified this problem retroactively at some point over the last 8 months.

debbie you might not be as savy as you think you are .....every new malware is one that nobody has ever seen before (the word new) also there is no definitions loaded into ANY "reputable malware software" to prevent it ....and many of the new breeds of malware include code to disable most antivirus software not to mention prevent you from going to many online repair sites this is very common and happens thousands of times everyday ......now I am sure YOU have been around the internet for many years, and know by now what is safe and what is not, but dont thumb your nose at those who are less savy as you (which you were )

Thanks, Tom, for clarifying how "not savy [sic]" I may or may not be. I appreciate you sharing your knowledge about how malware and anti-virus programs actually work. I guess it goes to show that after 22 years of experience with computers, I still have a lot to learn.

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/539027

Debbie everybody who posted here all say you are out of line and come across as snotty, and for your little link (“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” ) you are correct as we all must stop arguing with you since everything you have posted so far is incorrect

none of the above sounds very tech savvy btw... where does it go?!

I actually said: "It [losing internet when the consortium turns off the replacement servers that they've been running as a courtesy] is preventable if you have BASIC 21st century computer literacy skills..."

Believe me, I know that just because someone has a computer doesn't mean they know anything about how it works. I'm the same with my car: I know very little about how it really works even though I drive it almost every day. But I DO know if I get a recall notice or hear about a problem with my make/model/manufacturing year that I need to take action or at least have it checked by those more knowledgeable than I.

As for the customer base you work with, if they "only use their computers for email and to browse the internet" and "don't know or understand" how to open an attachment or where it goes once it's opened, they do not have 21st century literacy skills and I doubt anyone would consider them "tech savvy." I don't consider myself better than anyone else because I've been taught these skills over the years, but I do think it is important that people put forth the effort to learn what they need to know. If a computer is a part of your everyday life such that you would be severely impacted by losing your access, then you should have reputable malware protection and know not to click on suspicious links (and what constitutes one).