Religion riskier than porn for online viruses: study

May 01, 2012
Web wanderers more likely to get a computer virus by visiting a religious website than by peering at porn, study says
Web wanderers are more likely to get a computer virus by visiting a religious website than by peering at porn, according to a study released on Tuesday.

Web wanderers are more likely to get a computer virus by visiting a religious website than by peering at porn, according to a study released on Tuesday.

"Drive-by attacks" in which hackers booby-trap legitimate websites with malicious code continue to be a bane, the US-based anti-virus vendor Symantec said in its Internet Security Threat Report.

Websites with religious or ideological themes were found to have triple the average number of "threats" that those featuring adult content, according to Symantec.

"It is interesting to note that websites hosting adult/ are not in the top five, but ranked tenth," Symantec said in the report.

"We hypothesize that this is because pornographic website owners already make money from the Internet and, as a result, have a vested interest in keeping their sites malware-free; it's not good for repeat business."

The report was based on information gathered last year by the Symantec Global Intelligence Network, which monitors activity in more than 200 countries through its services and sensors.

Symantec said that it blocked 5.5 billion attacks in 2011 in an increase of 81 percent from the prior year.

In keeping with trends seen by other Internet security firms, Symantec reported surges in hacks aimed at smartphones or and in attacks targeting workers in companies or government agencies.

Explore further: Facebook teams with NFL to score with online video

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Symantec urges users to disable pcAnywhere

Jan 26, 2012

Symantec is recommending that users of its pcAnywhere software disable the product following the theft of source code from the US computer security firm.

Hacker thieves targeted Anonymous allies: Symantec

Mar 05, 2012

Anonymous on Monday gave mixed reactions to a US computer security firm's report that backers of the notorious hacker group were suckered into downloading software that steals online banking information.

Recommended for you

Web outage hardly stirs Internet-free N. Korea: experts

22 hours ago

North Korea's Internet went down this week after an apparent attack but most of its citizens will not have noticed the difference in a country that does its level best to seal off foreign influence, experts say.

Who pulled the plug on North Korea's Internet?

Dec 23, 2014

North Korea's Internet was on the fritz for a second day Tuesday. But the US is staying silent on whether it launched a cyber attack as payback for the hacking of Sony Pictures.

User comments : 20

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

djr
2.6 / 5 (5) May 01, 2012
I bet porn sites and religious sites are run by the same people. Pastor Peter Popov is probably behind most of them.....
muggins
3.3 / 5 (7) May 01, 2012
Well if someone believes in fairy tales then yes they are more prone to viruses.
Lurker2358
3 / 5 (6) May 01, 2012
Religious people are probably more prone to real viruses too, since Catholicism forbids the use of a condom.
kevinrtrs
1.4 / 5 (10) May 02, 2012
Religious people are probably more prone to real viruses too, since Catholicism forbids the use of a condom.

Your logic does not necessarily compute: If Catholic people were to follow biblical principles in addition to the Catholic prescriptions they should abstain from sexual immorality and hence not have ANY sexually transmitted viruses.

If, however they didn't follow the biblical precepts and had sex outside of a committed marriage to one partner of the opposite sex, why on earth would they constrain themselves to submitting to the Catholic idea of not using a condom? Doesn't make sense.
kevinrtrs
1.3 / 5 (13) May 02, 2012
Well if someone believes in fairy tales then yes they are more prone to viruses.

Strange, I tend to agree with you on this one:
People who believe in evolution are far more likely to commit sexual immorality and have sex outside of a committed marriage to one partner of the opposite sex - hence they are more prone to have sexually transmitted diseases.
As for getting viruses on one's computer - it can happen to anyone - irrespective of whether they believe in the evolutionary fairytale or not.
Anorion
1 / 5 (3) May 02, 2012
all those religious god fanatics who make child porn also put viruses, nothing new about it.
alfie_null
3.9 / 5 (7) May 02, 2012
... If Catholic people were to follow biblical principles ...

Interesting point. Monasticism, as per Paul's recommendation, will solve all of any group's problems within a generation or so. Or do you cherry-pick your principles?
Lurker2358
3 / 5 (4) May 02, 2012
Interesting point. Monasticism, as per Paul's recommendation, will solve all of any group's problems within a generation or so.


In theory yes, but in practice no.

Ironically, polygamy is actually quite genetic.

Monogamy was a relatively new concept as of Paul's time. If you read the Old Testament, almost every man mentioned by name had more than one wife. from about the 1/3rd mark in Genesis going forward; including half the patriarchs, and most of the priests, Judges, prophets, and Kings. And not just the ruling classes either. Even "ordinary men" had multiple wives, as you can find many examples of that in the texts.

There is nothing directly opposing polygamy in the Bible before Paul, and since Paul was actually addressing full time pastors and deacons, not laity, it's not even a clear commandment to ordinary people.

The Old Testament does not forbid polygamy, but actually has laws "regulating" it, such as not marrying two women who are sisters.

...cont...
Lurker2358
1 / 5 (3) May 02, 2012
The point of all of this is that monogamous relationships that actually work appear to be the exception to the rule.

In modern times, the majority of marriages fail within a couple years, and people like to believe that it was otherwise in the Victorian Age, but then again, women didn't have rights to vote either.

At any rate, polygamy actually makes sense from a certain point of view, because you have more adults in the household to distribute responsibilities, and when one woman is pregnant the other can help, etc.

If God was opposed to Polygamy, why does the Bible say that "God gave (David) his master's wiveS"? Plural!

I'm not saying that's for everyone or even that it should be the norm, but the point is there is certainly a disconnect between now and then.

And I'm also not by any means supporting anything like that pervert Warren Jeffs that married a bunch of 14 years olds in forced marriages. I'm talking about consenting adults.
Anorion
5 / 5 (3) May 02, 2012
@Lurker
if you find that polygamy makes sense, why not allow woman marry multiple mans ? after all it also exist in some cultures.
more mans in household means more revenues and better quality of life for all household.
a lot of people try to justify polygamy but ONLY if its man who have multiple wives. lets turn it around ? could you share your wife with another 1-3 mans ? how would you feel about it ? what you think how THEY feel when they have to share a husband with other woman ? polygamous dudes marry a girl, then after 10 years or so when she start to get old, marry another young one, and never touch the first one again, and so on... how would you feel if your wife marry a young guy and forgot about you and your only purpose is to bring money in household and work and clean a,d take care of kids,.... how would you feel ? make less sense suddenly, no ?
Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (6) May 02, 2012
Some visit porn sites religiously, and isn't religion itself a virus that seeks to propagate itself among the spineless and the stupid?

sethxdeath
1 / 5 (2) May 02, 2012
@KevinRTRS, why do you think evolution is a fairy tale? You brought it up and I'm interested.
sethxdeath
2.3 / 5 (3) May 02, 2012
@KevinRTRS, you really should learn what logical fallacies are so you'll stop making them. A person can contract sexually transmitted diseases while being in a monogamous relationship, or even while abstaining from sex entirely. If I didn't think you were being utterly disingenuous in every post you make, I'd explain, but I'm sure you already understand my point.
Lurker2358
1 / 5 (3) May 02, 2012
Anorion:

I think you're painting too broad of a brush.

Take for example that guy from "Sister wives". He has 4 wives, and I'd guess they're all within about 10 years age of one another.

The u.s. government oppresses them because of it, even though they take better care of the kids than most monogamous families.

His daughter made a comment that if a guy had 3 or 4 mistresses and didn't take care of his kids, the government wouldn't care, but because he has 4 "wives" that somehow makes it wrong, even though he's a better parent than the monogamous people.

I don't need 12 kids, that's definitely not for me, to each their own, but personally I think fewer is better on kids.

Things are different now than they were 200 years ago, or even 2000 years ago.

modern marriage is little more than a financial contract anyway.

If you love someone, you don't need a priest, a judge, a governor, or a marriage license to tell you that.
kochevnik
3 / 5 (6) May 02, 2012
By making sex scarce religion creates the demand for porn itself. Now Utah is the top consumer of porn.
MandoZink
2.6 / 5 (5) May 02, 2012
By making sex scarce religion creates the demand for porn itself. Now Utah is the top consumer of porn.

Anecdote: The only person ever fired from my place of employment for visiting porn sites was the most "hardcore" christian employee we had.
mikec74
1 / 5 (2) May 02, 2012
Anyone interested, we're using Verelo.com - scans our site daily.
Vendicar_Decarian
1 / 5 (1) May 02, 2012
According to Libertarian ideology if you want less of something you should tax it.

So if society want less of something like Child Molestation, government should legalize it and tax it.

"By making sex scarce religion creates the demand for porn itself." - Kochevnik

Worked for alcohol abuse didn't it? You don't find any drunks in America anymore.
Lurker2358
2 / 5 (1) May 05, 2012
Worked for alcohol abuse didn't it? You don't find any drunks in America anymore.


In theory, things should be manageable.

In practice, humans abuse them, and substances such as alcohol, which impair judgement are that much worse, because poor judgement breeds more poor judgement.

the biggest problem is the commercialization and marketing of alcohol to everyone as a social norm and a "rite of passage," and also sexualizing everything, etc. So drunkenness and all the violence and accidents and other iresponsibilities that go along with it are promoted, both intentionally and unintentionally.

People are hurt far, far more often and in more permanent ways by alcohol abuse than "polygamy abuse", even the Warren Jeffs kind, sick as that was, but alcohol is not only legal, but practically forced down people's throats at every turn by some sort of commercial ad, peer pressure, or just the fact half the businesses in town are bars, and half the convenience store is stocked with it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (4) May 05, 2012
People who believe in evolution are far more likely to commit sexual immorality and have sex outside of a committed marriage to one partner of the opposite sex - hence they are more prone to have sexually transmitted diseases.
Well isn't this bigotry if the worst sort? No wonder - your books are full of it. Morality is innate, instinctive, evolutionary. Claiming that it flows from any one god is immoral.

I remember when I was a student in Rome I was wandering around the ruins near the baths of Caracalla, and there were used condoms all over the place. Somebody's going to hell.
As for getting viruses on one's computer - it can happen to anyone - irrespective of whether they believe in the evolutionary fairytale or not.
But religionists as a rule do seem to be less intelligent and more trusting than the typical surfer? They are already rubes. No I am not being bigoted. Merely observant.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.