Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [NTO] deleted dmusic.sys by mistake - oops!

Expand Messages
  • loro
    ... I ve lived through 2K and now XP for a couple of years without getting anything either. Well, I did have something once that was somewhat of a problem to
    Message 1 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Axel wrote:
      >Mike wrote:
      > > I now use ZA, Avast, and SUPEREAntiSpyware.
      >
      >I have never ever had any malware of any kind (not counting the Netgear
      >card installation that so ruined my system, I had to install from
      >scratch). But then I refuse to run a "modern", "comfortable" OS that
      >just needs to be installed from its original CD and connected to the net
      >and that searches for, runs, and installs countless viruses all by
      >itself. On my Win98 I have to do all those virus installs manually
      >myself. Suits me fine.

      I've lived through 2K and now XP for a couple of years without
      getting anything either. Well, I did have something once that was
      somewhat of a problem to get rid of, but I don't remember the
      details. AFAIR it wasn't certain it was a virus in the first place
      and it didn't *do* anything.

      In what way do you mean modern Windows itself installs the viruses?
      Sound like something I need to learn about.

      BTW do know anything about this router firewall matter? I would like
      to run without a software firewall, but after this I don't know if I dare to.

      Lotta
    • Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV
      ... Nope. Registered HOME version. -mb
      Message 2 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        loro wrote:

        >
        > Mike Breiding wrote:
        > >I now use ZA, Avast, and SUPEREAntiSpyware.
        > >
        > >ZA routinely blocks unauthorized access and Avast has found more than
        > >one Trojan attached to bogus emails and web sites.
        >
        > Do you have the Paid version of Avast?

        Nope. Registered HOME version.
        -mb
      • Axel Berger
        ... Yes, it s a well documented fact. Of course the actively install is a bit of freedom with speech. What really happens, as far as I understood, is that
        Message 3 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Mick Housel wrote:
          > Maybe I read this wrong but do you really believe that the "modern",
          > "comfortable" OSs install and then instantly upon connection to the
          > net, the OS goes and installs countless viruses as part of it's
          > normal routine?

          Yes, it's a well documented fact. Of course the "actively install" is a
          bit of freedom with speech. What really happens, as far as I understood,
          is that there are some server functionalities built in, that the normal
          single user neither uses nor needs but that mayn viruses know to put to
          very good use. And of course this is true for naked CD installs without
          the later service packs. If you have one of those, need to reinstall and
          need the net to get those updates, you're in trouble.

          > but also makes sure that I've got a good AV and firewall
          > setup and going on all machines.

          Me specialty in engineering was nuclear reactors. There is a huge
          difference between active and passive security. A sodium cooled fast
          breeder needs active security controls and can run away if they fail. Of
          course all these are redundant and divers (i.e. different brands and
          technologies, so that not all will fail for the same reason) and it is
          made very safe. But our own pebble bed design from Aachen made it
          possible to withdraw all control rods (full power), shut off all cooling
          and do nothing. All it needs to stay safe is the continued validity of
          the laws of physics.
          Of course a good AV software is worth a lot and you may hope, you'll
          always be supplied with the relevant signatures before that malware
          arrives on your machine. I prefer there simply not to be a hook or entry
          for it to attack. Anything that doesn't exist can't be abused.

          Axel
        • Axel Berger
          ... I believe I do, but hope I ll be corrected if I spout nonsense. With a router the router has a public IP-address assigned by your provider and all
          Message 4 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            loro wrote:
            > BTW do know anything about this router firewall matter?

            I believe I do, but hope I'll be corrected if I spout nonsense. With a
            router the router has a public IP-address assigned by your provider and
            all connected computers have local addresses assigned by the router (or
            by yourself, if you turn the automatism off). So for any packet arriving
            from outside the router needs to know, which computer to forward it to.
            It does this by monitoring the requests you yourself make to outside
            servers and routes the answers back. Thus any unsolicited packets can't
            be assigned and are rejected.

            (If you want to run a webserver or FTP-server or anything like that, you
            need to program some specific forwarding into the router yourself.)

            This takes care of the new capabilties introduced with XP. I believe,
            but am not sure, 98 is safe from those even without a router. And of
            course all I described is true only for a totally unsecured computer
            running XP without any service packs - but that's exactly what you get
            by installing from CD and connecting to get the updates from the net.
            Typically the malware is faster than the installs, but a router does a
            lot to protect.

            Of course none of all that protects you from actively clicking a
            contaminated site with scripting allowed, but you knew that already.

            Axel
          • Sheri
            ... I believe a router firewall is only blocking uninvited inbound traffic. A software firewall probably doesn t see any unauthorized inbound traffic if you
            Message 5 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In ntb-OffTopic@yahoogroups.com, loro <tabbie@...> wrote:
              >
              > BTW do know anything about this router firewall matter? I would
              > like to run without a software firewall, but after this I don't
              > know if I dare to.

              I believe a router firewall is only blocking uninvited inbound traffic. A software firewall probably doesn't see any unauthorized inbound traffic if you have a router firewall in place. However a good software firewall can still block, allow or prompt for permission on outbound traffic. You should be able to configure it as to how to handle each app's attempts to make outbound connections.

              Regards,
              Sheri
            • Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV
              ... With Zone Alarm any requests are for outside access are handled with a pop up and you allow or disallow that instance only, or all which are requested by
              Message 6 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Sheri wrote:
                > However a good software
                > firewall can still block, allow or prompt for permission on outbound
                > traffic. You should be able to configure it as to how to handle each
                > app's attempts to make outbound connections. Regards, Sheri

                With Zone Alarm any requests are for outside access are handled with a
                pop up and you allow or disallow that instance only, or all which are
                requested by that particular app in the future.

                -mb
              • loro
                ... Yes, it s theats from the outside I m asking about. ... Mine did. Maybe that s a sign the router isn t configured properly, I don t know. Lotta
                Message 7 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  Sheri wrote:
                  > > BTW do know anything about this router firewall matter? I would
                  > > like to run without a software firewall, but after this I don't
                  > > know if I dare to.
                  >
                  >I believe a router firewall is only blocking uninvited inbound traffic.

                  Yes, it's theats from the outside I'm asking about.

                  > A software firewall probably doesn't see any unauthorized inbound
                  > traffic if you have a router firewall in place.

                  Mine did. Maybe that's a sign the router isn't configured properly, I
                  don't know.

                  Lotta
                • Mick Housel
                  ... Huh? It s a well known fact that when you download various updates, etc. for Windows OS from Microsoft, they install known viruses? ... I know absolutely
                  Message 8 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Axel Berger wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > Mick Housel wrote:
                    > > Maybe I read this wrong but do you really believe that the "modern",
                    > > "comfortable" OSs install and then instantly upon connection to the
                    > > net, the OS goes and installs countless viruses as part of it's
                    > > normal routine?
                    >
                    > Yes, it's a well documented fact. Of course the "actively install" is a
                    > bit of freedom with speech. What really happens, as far as I understood,
                    > is that there are some server functionalities built in, that the normal
                    > single user neither uses nor needs but that mayn viruses know to put to
                    > very good use. And of course this is true for naked CD installs without
                    > the later service packs. If you have one of those, need to reinstall and
                    > need the net to get those updates, you're in trouble.

                    Huh? It's a well known fact that when you download various updates,
                    etc. for Windows OS' from Microsoft, they install known viruses?

                    > > but also makes sure that I've got a good AV and firewall
                    > > setup and going on all machines.
                    >
                    > Me specialty in engineering was nuclear reactors. There is a huge
                    > difference between active and passive security. A sodium cooled fast
                    > breeder needs active security controls and can run away if they fail. Of
                    > course all these are redundant and divers (i.e. different brands and
                    > technologies, so that not all will fail for the same reason) and it is
                    > made very safe. But our own pebble bed design from Aachen made it
                    > possible to withdraw all control rods (full power), shut off all cooling
                    > and do nothing. All it needs to stay safe is the continued validity of
                    > the laws of physics.
                    > Of course a good AV software is worth a lot and you may hope, you'll
                    > always be supplied with the relevant signatures before that malware
                    > arrives on your machine. I prefer there simply not to be a hook or entry
                    > for it to attack. Anything that doesn't exist can't be abused.

                    I know absolutely nothing about nuclear reactors or anything of that
                    nature. However, I do know computer and network security. And when it
                    comes to either, there's no such thing as a system that's 100% secure.
                    Some of you may have heard about the BSoD (Blue Screen of Death) that
                    was "caused" by a Microsoft patch for a vulnerability that went all the
                    way back to the Win98 time period. It was soon discovered that it wasn't
                    a flaw in the patch but rather that the machines that were affected had
                    malware that was causing the issue. Within hours, the hackers of that
                    malware had issued an update that fixed the issue. After all, they don't
                    want their access/information feed to stop and that's what happens when
                    the infected machines stop running. My point is that even if you think
                    you're fully 100% protected, you aren't and things can happen.

                    There's a 16 year old kid in Alabama that kept pinging at and trying to
                    break through my firewall. He was warned numerous times to stop and not
                    go further. Finally, I made the call with the info that the authorities
                    needed to locate him. He swears he was just curious and he was lucky as
                    he didn't end up in jail/prison for an extended period of time.
                    Nowadays, trying to break into anyone's network/computer can be
                    considered to be a terrorist activity. Not something anyone really wants
                    to be charged with. This type of thing happens quite regularly, most of
                    them will not keep working on a tightly protected network once they
                    realize they're not going to get in.

                    Personally, I *know* that it's better to run one of the later OS's and
                    to have updated as much as possible. The same is true with most
                    browsers, they fix and update security breaches in them as they find
                    them so having the newer versions is generally a good thing unless it
                    causes plugins, etc. to not work.

                    Of course, this is only my opinion based on my experiences and
                    knowledge. YMMV.

                    Mick
                  • loro
                    ... No, that s one of the things I wasn t sure about, but I did know the rest. I guess that could be the explanation to how I got the crap, couldn t it? Most
                    Message 9 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Axel wrote:
                      >Of course none of all that protects you from actively clicking a
                      >contaminated site with scripting allowed, but you knew that already.

                      No, that's one of the things I wasn't sure about, but I did know the
                      rest. I guess that could be the explanation to how I got the crap,
                      couldn't it? Most software firewalls I've had warn about things like
                      that, even if they most often do it when the evil stuff already is on
                      your HD,but at least you can get rid of it fast enough. Maybe that's
                      a reason to keep a software FW.

                      I find them quite bothersome. Every new one you try do things
                      differently and it's time consuming to learn how they work in detail.
                      You think you've found a good one that don't slow things down too
                      much, then you upgrade and it has turned into a monster that does
                      everything but play cartoons. And the search for a program that is to
                      more use than harm starts again... AV is the same.

                      Lotta
                    • Mick Housel
                      Most routers don t have a hardware firewall built in. They may be able to block some ports through the router software but lower priced routers don t have a
                      Message 10 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Most routers don't have a hardware firewall built in. They may be able
                        to block some ports through the router software but lower priced routers
                        don't have a built in firewall.

                        One of the best free software firewalls available was from the Comodo
                        folks. I'm not sure if they still have it or not but it was better than
                        most free ones. I know Zone Alarm is another popular choice but I've
                        seen issues on some systems that try to run ZA, just like many have
                        issues with Norton/Symantec. It all depends on the system details as
                        well as what's installed on the system.

                        Locking down outgoing ports through a firewall can help in the fact that
                        it might stop some type of infection from communicating with it's
                        "parent" outside.

                        Mick

                        loro wrote:
                        > Sheri wrote:
                        > > > BTW do know anything about this router firewall matter? I would
                        > > > like to run without a software firewall, but after this I don't
                        > > > know if I dare to.
                        > >
                        > >I believe a router firewall is only blocking uninvited inbound traffic.
                        >
                        > Yes, it's theats from the outside I'm asking about.
                        >
                        > > A software firewall probably doesn't see any unauthorized inbound
                        > > traffic if you have a router firewall in place.
                        >
                        > Mine did. Maybe that's a sign the router isn't configured properly, I
                        > don't know.
                        >
                        > Lotta
                      • Mick Housel
                        Running an FTP or webserver is something that should only be done through a hardware firewall and with numerous defensive shields to your machine in place.
                        Message 11 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Running an FTP or webserver is something that should only be done
                          through a hardware firewall and with numerous defensive shields to your
                          machine in place. Allowing that kind of access is just begging for
                          problems and folks attacking you.

                          Again, just my opinion and YMMV.

                          Mick

                          Axel Berger wrote:
                          > (If you want to run a webserver or FTP-server or anything like that, you
                          > need to program some specific forwarding into the router yourself.)
                        • edward
                          Since ZA sold out they have become more trouble than their worth because of constant ads to upgrade to the paid version. I have the latest in Comodo and am
                          Message 12 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Since ZA sold out they have become more trouble than their worth because of
                            constant ads to upgrade to the paid version. I have the latest in Comodo and
                            am well pleased with it. I use the Comodo Suite, it is free for personal
                            use, business need to purchase if I am not mistaken
                            Ed B
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: "Mick Housel" <motomania@...>
                            To: <ntb-OffTopic@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 3:55 PM
                            Subject: Re: [NTO] deleted dmusic.sys by mistake - oops!


                            > Most routers don't have a hardware firewall built in. They may be able
                            > to block some ports through the router software but lower priced routers
                            > don't have a built in firewall.
                            >
                            > One of the best free software firewalls available was from the Comodo
                            > folks. I'm not sure if they still have it or not but it was better than
                            > most free ones. I know Zone Alarm is another popular choice but I've
                            > seen issues on some systems that try to run ZA, just like many have
                            > issues with Norton/Symantec. It all depends on the system details as
                            > well as what's installed on the system.
                            >
                            > Locking down outgoing ports through a firewall can help in the fact that
                            > it might stop some type of infection from communicating with it's
                            > "parent" outside.
                            >
                            > Mick
                            >
                            > loro wrote:
                            >> Sheri wrote:
                            >> > > BTW do know anything about this router firewall matter? I would
                            >> > > like to run without a software firewall, but after this I don't
                            >> > > know if I dare to.
                            >> >
                            >> >I believe a router firewall is only blocking uninvited inbound traffic.
                            >>
                            >> Yes, it's theats from the outside I'm asking about.
                            >>
                            >> > A software firewall probably doesn't see any unauthorized inbound
                            >> > traffic if you have a router firewall in place.
                            >>
                            >> Mine did. Maybe that's a sign the router isn't configured properly, I
                            >> don't know.
                            >>
                            >> Lotta
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > ------------------------------------
                            >
                            > Yahoo! Groups Links
                            >
                            >
                            >
                          • jeff
                            Anyone else have trouble with the latest Firefox update? Mine is claiming a Javascript error and hangs permanently, requiring a RESET through files manager.
                            Message 13 of 26 , Feb 20, 2010
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Anyone else have trouble with the latest Firefox update?

                              Mine is claiming a Javascript error and hangs permanently, requiring a
                              RESET through files manager. (XP Pro)
                            • Axel Berger
                              ... Of course not. But if you want to do that you may need to connect an unprotected computer to the net. Viruses will find and infect you in minutes. ... Yes,
                              Message 14 of 26 , Feb 21, 2010
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Mick Housel wrote:
                                > It's a well known fact that when you download various updates,
                                > etc. for Windows OS' from Microsoft, they install known viruses?

                                Of course not. But if you want to do that you may need to connect an
                                unprotected computer to the net. Viruses will find and infect you in
                                minutes.

                                > There's a 16 year old kid in Alabama that kept pinging at and
                                > trying to break through my firewall.

                                Yes, when dealing with sentient beings actively targeting me then my
                                old, less sophisticated and long known OS will be very easy to break.
                                The thread so far was about automated and of necessity small malware
                                programs. Here using minority software and setting up differently from
                                the defaults will alone offer a lot of protection from anything coursing
                                in the wild.

                                And I still maintain that most of current malware, that does not require
                                user interation, makes use of OS features that my old OS simply does not
                                have. What's not there needs not be made secure. As an extreme example
                                (extreme for you and me, standard for all companies that have something
                                to protect): Keep any machine containing sensitive information out of
                                all networks and run it standing alone.

                                > Personally, I *know* that it's better to run one of the later
                                > OS's and to have updated as much as possible.

                                Some time ago one of the main advisors of our university computing
                                centre confirmed, that Win98 does not have the capability of being
                                attacked without user action. His tone was a little condescending, as if
                                confirming that CP/M too was safe from current viuses, but still, so far
                                Win98 does all I need. I'll need to move to Linux some day soon, I'm not
                                prepared to phone Mr. Gates every time I change my hardware, but so far
                                I keep putting it off.

                                Axel
                              • fw7oaks
                                ... [snip] ... Those were the days, Axel, all the OS you needed from a 5¼ inch 360k floppy. fw
                                Message 15 of 26 , Feb 21, 2010
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- On Sun, 2/21/10, Axel Berger <Axel-Berger@...> wrote:

                                  [snip]

                                  > His tone was a little condescending, as if confirming that CP/M too
                                  > was safe from current viuses,

                                  Those were the days, Axel, all the OS you needed from a 5¼ inch 360k floppy.

                                  fw
                                • Stephen Riddle
                                  ... Uh, that s still true. All we really n e e d was around in 1990. It s the fun stuff that gets us down.
                                  Message 16 of 26 , Feb 21, 2010
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    > > [snip]
                                    > > His tone was a little condescending, as if confirming that CP/M too
                                    > > was safe from current viuses,

                                    > Those were the days, Axel, all the OS you needed from a 5¼ inch 360k floppy.
                                    >
                                    Uh, that's still true. All we really n e e d was around in 1990. It's the fun stuff that gets us down.
                                  • Axel Berger
                                    ... Although that goes against all my prejudices and instincts I disagree here. Of course in the strongest sense we don t need a computer at all. I still write
                                    Message 17 of 26 , Feb 21, 2010
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Stephen Riddle wrote:
                                      > All we really n e e d was around in 1990. It's the fun
                                      > stuff that gets us down.

                                      Although that goes against all my prejudices and instincts I disagree
                                      here. Of course in the strongest sense we don't need a computer at all.
                                      I still write my letters using a simple text editor and the built-in
                                      unproportional printer fonts. A several dozens of megabytes office suite
                                      only adds bells and whistles and often makes the end product worse. But
                                      my father recorded radio programs onto reel-to-reel tape and so did I
                                      until about 1995. I then changed to DAT digital tape and was very
                                      disappointed, the mechanics just did not last under heavy use. I now use
                                      computers and good sound cards throughout. I began burning MP3-CDs but
                                      now all data and backups are on several harddisks, that continue to
                                      become bigger and cheaper.
                                      In a way that is a need served. It used to be out of the reach of home
                                      computing and now is well within. Something similar is watching films on
                                      DVD, I have no other equipment to do that, no TV, and no VHS.

                                      So yes, there are new capabilities and they do call for buying new and
                                      higher powered equipment, but there are not too many of these. There
                                      rarely is any improvement on what older machines did well already.

                                      Axel
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.