I would be quite curious as to the answer also...jæd said:I'd be interested in how I'm supposed to browse website "smarter", though...?
Arsed off with Vista
- Thread starter Fingers
- Start date
well Kanda, there are people out there that are trying to emulate "known" websites - or you can get redirected to a website automatically. in addition, with all the bleedin' links and stuff out there you don't know where you'll end up 100% of the time.Kanda said:
and what of the people who have to do research, etc...?
basically your idea is very nice but impractical in the real world.
maybe i'll just throw away my laptop and go to the bleedin' lendin' library.
Detroit City said:
And what about websites that you thought were "established" but get hacked and start downloading malware...? It just strikes me as strange that two o/s can be secure (as much as a o/s can be secure) by default, yet Xp isn't.
I'm hoping that Vista will be better, but so far my impression is that people are disabling the protection because its too intrusive... I wish they'd changed the underlying design, rather bolt something on afterwards...
Mac Classic used to be like Windows and get viruses, and this got fixed. Why can't Microsoft do the same...?
Boris Sprinkler
Dont be scared
Detroit City said:
you must have me ignored since I showed you a product aimed specifically for the clueless.
Kanda
Diving wanker
Detroit City said:
No it's not. It works for me, works for the guy that works for me etc...
This could go on and on, my take is: If you don't know what you're clicking on (or confident it's safe) then don't click it. Simple really and has been serving me rather well across dozens of Windows installs in dozens of enviroments for over 10 years. In that 10 years I've also had to do a fair bit of research into problems/projects or whatever too.
Boris Sprinkler said:
- their "free" products are shit and are lures to get you to buy the full version
- the full versions are memory hogs that bog down you machine even more
- why should i have to pay additional for an even remotely secure machine?
- some say these same companies are creating and spreading the virus/malware to increase their own sales
- i didn't ignore your suggestion
Boris Sprinkler
Dont be scared
Detroit City said:
1) Nope not at all. It's free, it helps McAfee gather samples of mailicious code.
2) There is no full version. That's it. It sits in your browser as a plugin, memory and network usage are minimal, otherwise i wouldn't have given my IT managers the green light to install it or our network, this includes places where the fastest internet connection out of the country is a 512kb line. For an office.
3) You already pay for the windows license, jokes on you. Since you are unable to use your pc without picking up virii, thought I'd help you since you seem to be a danger to yourself on the internetz.
4) I once mentioned this to George Kurtz, he finds it quite amusing (well he cracked a smile, which is saying something...). I'm currently doing some research into Malware development from within the PRC region. If only I'd known it was McAfee writing this stuff....
5) Touche.
Boris Sprinkler said:
So you agree with Kanda viruses are a user problem...?
Detroit City, I'd really suggest you give Mac a spin when you are next upgrading. You'll be able to surf where-ever you want to without having to conduct background checks first. And you'll be able to forget* about virus protection sca^h^h software...
Of course no o/s is 100% secure but anything other than Windows goes along way.
Oh, and you'll be able to install Windows on it if you have applications you can't find Mac equivalents for...
*Unless you ever try to use OS X and a certain very big corp...
I'm seriously considering that for the first time in my life...at least the way things are going now. But since this laptop is only one year old it is a few years before I buy a new one.jæd said:Detroit City, I'd really suggest you give Mac a spin when you are next upgrading.
And i've been using IBM/WinTel shit since 1986
Boris Sprinkler
Dont be scared
jæd said:
yes. Of course insecure platforms and browsers allow them to propogate, however applying patches when released and changing computing habits will combat this since viruses need user intervention to spread.
Worms on the other hand don't, again these can be mitigated against, with the correct behaviour.
The only viruses I have had in the past 6 years have been intentionally installed.
Use the computer properly it won't be a problem.
Products such as AV, Firewalls and other Anti X products exist for a reason.
Boris Sprinkler said:
Thing is, I see computer viruses as something arising from bad o/s design. They're not naturally occuring, so if they do occur there's a reason for them... I see worms as the same. There's ways to change the environment so that there's no point writing them...
Firewalls are useful, but AV exists because its allowed to. If Microsoft wanted to, they could eliminate them. But they won't because its not in their long-term interests...
Last virus I can remember that was personally annoying was a Word virus on Mac Classic ages ago. Although I regularly get friends who ask me to remove viruses from their Xp computers...
of course....the hardcore computer nerds who never get girls have to have something to do. it all comes down to sex, if they clowns were getting laid they would have little time to create viruses/malware, etc...Kanda said:
Kanda said:
Do you understand how unix style permissions, along with correct usage of Users & Groups works...? I reckon *not*.
So far, in the five years since the start of OS X, there hasn't been a virus in the wild, and there hasn't been one on Unix for donkey's years. And people are just as interested in security holes on OS X as they are on Windows, if not more because of its more of a challenge.
I'm not going to say it will never happen, just that its very, very, very, very unlikely...
Kanda
Diving wanker
jæd said:Do you understand how unix style permissions, along with correct usage of Users & Groups works...? I reckon *not*.
So far, in the five years since the start of OS X, there hasn't been a virus in the wild, and there hasn't been one on Unix for donkey's years. And people are just as interested in security holes on OS X as they are on Windows, if not more because of its more of a challenge.
I'm not going to say it will never happen, just that its very, very, very, very unlikely...
Of course I do.
But you open yourself up there by saying *the correct usage of users and groups*
If people can't get it right in XP how are they going to have the knowledge of *nix that is going to stop them doing something stupid????
you can't compare UNIX to OS-X and Windows....UNIX is a secure, fault-tolerant op system that is rock solid and used by the world's largest companies to run their systems.jæd said:
yea tell me some more bullshit...Kanda said:
Kanda
Diving wanker
jæd said:Check out OS X and it handles it. Its pretty good. They also handle sudo quite well for when you need to install stuff...
I played with it's first incarnation, when my old company had a design studio.
My point was... just like in Windows, a user sits and runs everything as Admin, is that possible in OS X?
Kanda said:
Its changed a lot. Try it sometime...
Kanda said:
Not really. By default a user is a generic user. Anytime you need to be root you need to type your password in, just like sudo in Unix. (Ie, say you were installing a new driver). But if you aren't part of the admin group you can't do this...
You can switch to being the super-user full-time on the command-line by doing "sudo su", but there's no way to login and use the gui as root.
no i don't...Kanda said:
but OS X is not true UNIX....it has a number of known weaknesses and has a hybrid kernel which doesn't classify it as pure UNIX.
Similar threads
