Greetings.
I went back 867 messages in this group and, besides finding interesting soap
operas that took me hours to read *smiles*, I did not find anything about
setting services for XP so that it doesn't "phone home" with things MS
doesn't need to know for the OS to be functional. I would imagine that
turning off some services may decrease the amount of CPU usage required to
operate it. If this is not the correct newsgroup, please point me in the
correct direction. Thank you.
Kevin
Complete list of Startup programs:
http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_content.htm
HTH,
Tom
"General Mailbox" <keepspam@away.com> wrote in message
news:yih7b.5031$Yt.4542@newsread4.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
> Greetings.
> I went back 867 messages in this group and, besides finding interesting
soap
> operas that took me hours to read *smiles*, I did not find anything about
> setting services for XP so that it doesn't "phone home" with things MS
> doesn't need to know for the OS to be functional. I would imagine that
> turning off some services may decrease the amount of CPU usage required to
> operate it. If this is not the correct newsgroup, please point me in the
> correct direction. Thank you.
> Kevin
>
>
"General Mailbox" <keepspam@away.com> wrote in
news:yih7b.5031$Yt.4542@newsread4.news.pas.earthli nk.net:
> Greetings.
> I went back 867 messages in this group and, besides finding
> interesting soap operas that took me hours to read *smiles*, I did not
> find anything about setting services for XP so that it doesn't "phone
> home" with things MS doesn't need to know for the OS to be functional.
> I would imagine that turning off some services may decrease the
> amount of CPU usage required to operate it. If this is not the
> correct newsgroup, please point me in the correct direction. Thank
> you. Kevin
>
>
See http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm
This tells you what each service is and why you may or may not want
to disable it.
data64
"General Mailbox" <keepspam@away.com> wrote in message
news:yih7b.5031$Yt.4542@newsread4.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
> Greetings.
> I went back 867 messages in this group and, besides finding interesting
soap
> operas that took me hours to read *smiles*, I did not find anything about
> setting services for XP so that it doesn't "phone home" with things MS
> doesn't need to know for the OS to be functional. I would imagine that
> turning off some services may decrease the amount of CPU usage required to
> operate it. If this is not the correct newsgroup, please point me in the
> correct direction. Thank you.
> Kevin
>
A useful tool, http://www.xp-antispy.org/news-e.php
"General Mailbox" <keepspam@away.com> wrote in
news:yih7b.5031$Yt.4542@newsread4.news.pas.earthli nk.net:
> anything about
> setting services for XP so that it doesn't "phone home" with things MS
> doesn't need to know for the OS to be functional. I would imagine
> that turning off some services may decrease the amount of CPU usage
> required to operate it.
See:
http://www.uksecurityonline.com/husd...leservices.htm
Thank you one and all!
Excellent references. That's enough reading to constitute a diploma when I
get done! *smiles*
Kevin
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 09:45:02 GMT, in <alt.privacy.spyware>, "General
Mailbox" <keepspam@away.com> wrote:
>
> Greetings.
> I went back 867 messages in this group and, besides finding interesting
> soap operas that took me hours to read *smiles*, I did not find anything
> about setting services for XP so that it doesn't "phone home" with things
> MS doesn't need to know for the OS to be functional.
[snip]
That's probably because there is no such thing as a complete list of such
vulnerabilities and hazards. WinXP is *inherently* both insecure and
"spyware" in and of itself. For some of the background info which leads
inevitably to that conclusion, see:
<http://www.hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm>
or <http://www.futurepower.net/microsoft.htm>
The ONLY prudent course of action is to remove it entirely from your system,
replacing it with a less user-hostile operating system (if you insist on
sticking with the WinNT code base -- which, BTW, you are presumably already
licensed for by virtue of your copy of XP -- Windows 2000 Pro is probably
your best bet).
--
Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOTE: E-Mail address in "From:" line is INVALID! Remove +SPAMBLOCK to mail.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
$1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
X-No-Archive: yes
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 06:58:59 GMT,"General Mailbox" posted ...
>Thank you one and all!
>Excellent references. That's enough reading to constitute a diploma when I
>get done! *smiles*
Just another suggestion, I use ZoneAlarm Pro with Win XP. ZAP tells me
if a program is trying to call home and will stop it from doing so. This
is as as well as securing my computer from others attempts to get in.
Win XP has its own firewall of sorts but which only helps stop things
coming in and not calling home.
--
Chris Bee
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 04:17:49 -0700, Tom Reynolds wrote:
Frankly, I have allowed both third party net-sniffers and third party
firewalls run on my WP-Pro box for some time, and have never seen a time
in which my computer tried to connect to a computer that was owned by MS,
This phone home theory seems to be lacking in any hard evidence. The
multiple open netowrk ports have little to do with phone home and much to
do with a poorly organized method of sharing network resources. I agree
with using a third party firewall, such as Zone Alarm or Kerio Personal
Firewall, I dont worry about MS tracking my computer use.
> Complete list of Startup programs:
> http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_content.htm
> HTH,
> Tom
> "General Mailbox" <keepspam@away.com> wrote in message
> news:yih7b.5031$Yt.4542@newsread4.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
>> Greetings.
>> I went back 867 messages in this group and, besides finding interesting
> soap
>> operas that took me hours to read *smiles*, I did not find anything about
>> setting services for XP so that it doesn't "phone home" with things MS
>> doesn't need to know for the OS to be functional. I would imagine that
>> turning off some services may decrease the amount of CPU usage required to
>> operate it. If this is not the correct newsgroup, please point me in the
>> correct direction. Thank you.
>> Kevin
>>
>>
"Johnathan David Hawke" <dropdead@spammers.get.a.life> wrote in message
newsan.2003.09.14.01.47.00.858317@spammers.get.a.life. ..
> On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 04:17:49 -0700, Tom Reynolds wrote:
> Frankly, I have allowed both third party net-sniffers and third party
> firewalls run on my WP-Pro box for some time, and have never seen a time
> in which my computer tried to connect to a computer that was owned by MS,
> This phone home theory seems to be lacking in any hard evidence. The
> multiple open netowrk ports have little to do with phone home and much to
> do with a poorly organized method of sharing network resources. I agree
> with using a third party firewall, such as Zone Alarm or Kerio Personal
> Firewall, I dont worry about MS tracking my computer use.
>
Just a curious question here: if I connect to the Windows Update site, it
will tell me there are, say, 4 downloads to be installed, 10.3 Mb, 3 mins at
your connection speed.
I haven't told the site my connection speed.......how does it know?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote