The Ministry of Public Security released on September 14 the result of the nation’s inaugural survey on the Internet information security and computer virus: the infection rate of the computers of users in China is 87.9 percent and 36 percent of the security incidents are caused by massive spam transmission.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Virus-related information of totally 7, 072 departments, including those in governments, finance, education and research, telecommunication, commerce, was collected. Plus, over 8,400 computer users were covered.<\/p>\n
The survey was launched by the Bureau Public Information and Internet Security Supervision under the Ministry of Public Security and the Professional Committee of Computer Security of China Computer Federation.<\/p>\n
The survey shows that 87.9-percent infection rate among the computers of users in Chin, 2 percent up from the last year.<\/p>\n
The most widespread computer viruses are Internet Worm virus and the viruses or vicious codes targeting Internet-browsing software: “Worm.Sasser”, “Worm.NetSky”, “Worm.Nimda” and “Digispid.B.Worm” etc. Internet-aimed destruction is on a rampant rise.<\/p>\n
Particularly devastating but less detectable are those computer viruses stealing sensitive information of computer users, e.g. user account and password.<\/p>\n
58 percent of the surveyed departments have had accidents in cyber security and 36 percent of the incidents are caused by massive transmission of spam.<\/p>\n
As analyzed the main causes of Internet security incidents are: poor implementation of regulations, low security awareness, ill-trained management staff in security and a lack of effective channel of security information reporting. Moreover security service trades incapable of meeting the needs of the society remain a tough problem.<\/p>\n
http:\/\/english.peopledaily.com.cn\/200409\/14\/eng20040914_156990.html<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1775","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-statistics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1775","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1775"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1775\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4262,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1775\/revisions\/4262"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1775"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1775"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1775"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}