<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 31 Things Admins Should Do to Increase Their Web Security</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gfi.com/blog/31-admins-increase-web-security/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gfi.com/blog/31-admins-increase-web-security/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=31-admins-increase-web-security</link>
	<description>Brought to you by GFI Software</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2013 12:13:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Meg Gregory</title>
		<link>http://www.gfi.com/blog/31-admins-increase-web-security/comment-page-1/#comment-30014</link>
		<dc:creator>Meg Gregory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Oct 2011 07:28:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gfi.com/blog/?p=3514#comment-30014</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Browsers tend to block legitimate sites for past abuse and this causes inconvenience. I remember a friend of mine tried to contact some embassy and he got this fake message that the site is infected. When I checked it, it turned out it came clean. No doubt, it is much better to get fake reportings than to get infected but I just wanted to point out that browser security too isn&#039;t very reliable.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Browsers tend to block legitimate sites for past abuse and this causes inconvenience. I remember a friend of mine tried to contact some embassy and he got this fake message that the site is infected. When I checked it, it turned out it came clean. No doubt, it is much better to get fake reportings than to get infected but I just wanted to point out that browser security too isn&#8217;t very reliable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Attard</title>
		<link>http://www.gfi.com/blog/31-admins-increase-web-security/comment-page-1/#comment-29987</link>
		<dc:creator>David Attard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:14:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gfi.com/blog/?p=3514#comment-29987</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@KC and @Papa Joe: yes browser protection does offer additional protection. I should have added that as part of point 9. They have one problem though - they typically do not cover the latest threats - so you are still at risk. The idea that one browser (be it Chrome or anything) is the solution to web security problems, is a dangerous game to play.

@KC - Remember, reputation will not typically hinder your browsing - its only going to protect where necessary. With web reputation you can have varying policies for different users based on reputation of websites. Say, you allow certain people access to trustworthy sites only, and then give administrators more rights. Reputation gives a score which tpyically indicates that a site is dangerous - before it actually becomes a threat. It is the ultimate tool in web security. 

You also raise a very interesting misconception. A rising threat is that of search-engine poisoning. Malware authors are now using techniques to rise up the search engine page rankings for popular keywords, in popular search engines. However, with something such as Web Reputation and blocking of known malicious websites, user browsing is as safe as it can get.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@KC and @Papa Joe: yes browser protection does offer additional protection. I should have added that as part of point 9. They have one problem though &#8211; they typically do not cover the latest threats &#8211; so you are still at risk. The idea that one browser (be it Chrome or anything) is the solution to web security problems, is a dangerous game to play.</p>
<p>@KC &#8211; Remember, reputation will not typically hinder your browsing &#8211; its only going to protect where necessary. With web reputation you can have varying policies for different users based on reputation of websites. Say, you allow certain people access to trustworthy sites only, and then give administrators more rights. Reputation gives a score which tpyically indicates that a site is dangerous &#8211; before it actually becomes a threat. It is the ultimate tool in web security. </p>
<p>You also raise a very interesting misconception. A rising threat is that of search-engine poisoning. Malware authors are now using techniques to rise up the search engine page rankings for popular keywords, in popular search engines. However, with something such as Web Reputation and blocking of known malicious websites, user browsing is as safe as it can get.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Papa Joe Monroe</title>
		<link>http://www.gfi.com/blog/31-admins-increase-web-security/comment-page-1/#comment-29972</link>
		<dc:creator>Papa Joe Monroe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 06:23:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gfi.com/blog/?p=3514#comment-29972</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree with you KC. Private browsing tools are really helpful. But I don&#039;t use Firefox. I&#039;m currently using Google Chrome - for me, the fastest and most secure web browser ;). In Chrome you can use its private browsing tool by enabling Incognito or Guest Browsing.

Incognito is an innovative web security feature that can hide your browsing activity from others. Your download histories are also not recorded. Cookies are also automatically deleted after use.

Guest Browsing works like Incognito but you have limited use of Chrome&#039;s features. Try Google Chrome and you don&#039;t have to worry about your web security issues.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you KC. Private browsing tools are really helpful. But I don&#8217;t use Firefox. I&#8217;m currently using Google Chrome &#8211; for me, the fastest and most secure web browser <img src='http://www.gfi.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> . In Chrome you can use its private browsing tool by enabling Incognito or Guest Browsing.</p>
<p>Incognito is an innovative web security feature that can hide your browsing activity from others. Your download histories are also not recorded. Cookies are also automatically deleted after use.</p>
<p>Guest Browsing works like Incognito but you have limited use of Chrome&#8217;s features. Try Google Chrome and you don&#8217;t have to worry about your web security issues.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KC Merks</title>
		<link>http://www.gfi.com/blog/31-admins-increase-web-security/comment-page-1/#comment-29964</link>
		<dc:creator>KC Merks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:58:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gfi.com/blog/?p=3514#comment-29964</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Another thing an admin can do to increase web security is to enable a browser&#039;s online protection tool. Most major web browsers have this feature. In Firefox, for example, this can be turned on by enabling Start Private Browsing. You can go to the Tools tab then click the said feature. 

For me web reputation blocking is not very effective and practical. What if your job entails you to visit lots of websites? Your work will be affected. Instead, try to search for websites by using Google or Yahoo. I know the former search engine has a built-in tool that can detect if a website is legit or not.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another thing an admin can do to increase web security is to enable a browser&#8217;s online protection tool. Most major web browsers have this feature. In Firefox, for example, this can be turned on by enabling Start Private Browsing. You can go to the Tools tab then click the said feature. </p>
<p>For me web reputation blocking is not very effective and practical. What if your job entails you to visit lots of websites? Your work will be affected. Instead, try to search for websites by using Google or Yahoo. I know the former search engine has a built-in tool that can detect if a website is legit or not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ross Tompkins</title>
		<link>http://www.gfi.com/blog/31-admins-increase-web-security/comment-page-1/#comment-29954</link>
		<dc:creator>Ross Tompkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2011 04:43:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gfi.com/blog/?p=3514#comment-29954</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s kind of sad the way that admins have to be the &quot;cautious parent&quot; for their users, but then if nobody else is going to look out for the company&#039;s security, someone&#039;s got to. These are all pretty good tips but certainly none are as important as the last one - educating your users means creating safer practices for both the office and home. If you&#039;re used to it, it gets to be easy.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s kind of sad the way that admins have to be the &#8220;cautious parent&#8221; for their users, but then if nobody else is going to look out for the company&#8217;s security, someone&#8217;s got to. These are all pretty good tips but certainly none are as important as the last one &#8211; educating your users means creating safer practices for both the office and home. If you&#8217;re used to it, it gets to be easy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

 Served from: www.gfi.com @ 2013-08-12 14:14:19 by W3 Total Cache --