XP is broken broken broken

XP is broken broken broken

Post by zurg » Mon, 28 Jun 2004 17:57:37


Gees, I can't resist skipping one more rock out over the placcid waters
of CSMA. It's such a lovely and warm evening and the moon shimmers on
the surface in such a calming way so... let's start some screaming. :^)

I think this has been posted here before actually, but it's worth a
re-read. Certainly nails the argument that Windows only has viruses
because it's so popular and anyone who argues otherwise is wrong and in
denial:

http://www.yqcomputer.com/

As the Queen of R'lyeh is so fond of saying, "Cuss and discuss."
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Nashto » Mon, 28 Jun 2004 20:15:31


http://www.yqcomputer.com/

Pipe, smoke, etc.

Nicolas

 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Dawg Tai » Mon, 28 Jun 2004 23:45:54


Using a firewall and running as a non-privileged account would have
stopped the malware cited in the article.

Minimizing your risk to this kind of code is easy. Make a couple of
changes and you'll be much more safer.
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Snit » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 00:52:50

"Dawg Tail" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in
XXXX@XXXXX.COM on 6/27/04 7:45 AM:



What else, if anything, do you suggest to be safe from malware on Windows
XP?

--
See responses to flames
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by William Wh » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 00:55:49

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,




Yeah, and wearing seatbelts reduces your risk of injury in accidents
while driving, but there's a lot of people who still don't use them.
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Snit » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 01:02:05

"William White" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in
XXXX@XXXXX.COM on 6/27/04 8:55 AM:




And, of course, people still die who *are* wearing them.

--
See responses to flames
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Fred Garvi » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 02:31:33


Exactly Right, like switching to Linux for instance. I did 2 years ago.
Never looked back.
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Snit » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 02:36:52

"Fred Garvin" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in
XXXX@XXXXX.COM on 6/27/04 10:31 AM:


While you are, of course, correct, that is not one of the changes that Dawg
is obsessed with. Wonder if he will jump in and acknowledge that that your
idea is an effective one that he does tends to ignore?


--
See responses to flames
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by imouttaher » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 03:27:50


Interesting issue, but a *** ed up Mac install issue is not apropos to
the article about 3rd party crapware/malware.

here's a map pal:

http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ~mamama/egypt/nile-map.jpg


mebbe you can figure out where you are right now.
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by imouttaher » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 03:31:44


funny that didn't work for Thurrot.
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Snit » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 03:51:56

"Heywood Mogroot" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in
XXXX@XXXXX.COM on 6/27/04 11:31 AM:





Well, maybe Thurrot would also have to be obsessed with those two
suggestions...


--
See responses to flames
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Dawg Tai » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 04:12:29

On 27 Jun 2004 11:31:44 -0700, XXXX@XXXXX.COM (Heywood Mogroot)





I didn't see any indication that Thurrot was running as a
non-privileged user. The fact that he mentioned "deep cleaning" would
lead me to believe that just the opposite was the case.

It's really easy. Without privileged access software cannot write to
system directories or registry hives. No one has disproven this basic
fact
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Snit » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 05:52:33

"Dawg Tail" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in
XXXX@XXXXX.COM on 6/27/04 12:12 PM:






Nor has anyone shown that malware must write to system directories or
registry hives.

--
See responses to flames
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Dawg Tai » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 07:00:34

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 13:52:33 -0700, Snit < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >







OK. And?
 
 
 

XP is broken broken broken

Post by Snit » Tue, 29 Jun 2004 07:09:18

"Dawg Tail" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in
XXXX@XXXXX.COM on 6/27/04 3:00 PM:







I am glad we are in agreement over this.


And it would be appreciated if you would either support your malicious
claims about my experiences or take back your accusations.

You will do neither, of course.

--
See responses to flames