Which virus/spyware scanners?

[Ron]

On May 13, 12:23 am, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 May 2008 00:35:04 GMT, "Just.some.guy"
>
>
>
> <return.em...@address.not.valid.com> wrote:
>
> >"Straight Talk" <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:5neh241ccia5urlsd7j1dsq8c5sj7ds43f@4ax.com.. .
> >> On Mon, 12 May 2008 10:42:42 GMT, "Just.some.guy"
> >> <return.em...@address.not.valid.com> wrote:
>
> >>>"Straight Talk" <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:lutf249kpuachrcp0i6vp14uoumq5gbc2j@4ax.com ...
> >>>> On Sat, 10 May 2008 22:28:50 -0700 (PDT), Ron <BigELil...@msn.com>
> >>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>On May 11, 1:20 am, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sat, 10 May 2008 22:05:45 -0700 (PDT), Ron <BigELil...@msn.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> SyGate is a security disaster - but you most likely wouldn't care.
>
> >>>>>Hack my computer, moron.
>
> >>>> Why should I bother, moron?
>
> >>>> Heck, your question even proves that you don't even understand the
> >>>> problems of SyGate.
>
> >>>What question did he ask? When did he ask it?
>
> >> He repeatedly asked me to hack his computer, didn't he?
>
> >Um...uh...er...hate to tell you this..but no... he didn't. Try again.. this
> >is funny:-)
>
> Yes it is. I never claimed to be able to hack his computer. Still the
> idiot continues to challenge me. Very funny indeed.



You said "SyGate is a security disaster" but yet you can't hack my
computer....how come, genius?

Backup your claim that "SyGate is a security disaster", somehow,
someway.

[Franklin]

On Tue 13 May 2008 05:25:39, Straight Talk wrote:

> On Tue, 13 May 2008 00:52:53 GMT, "Just.some.guy"
> <return.email@address.not.valid.com> wrote:
>
>>Ok...no response from you. He *dared* you to hack his computer.
>>That's not a question...there *is* a difference.
>
> Sorry. I can't solve your comprehension problems.


Hi Straight Talk

I think people are saying that Rom sort of *commanded* you to hack his
computer as opposed to making a *request* that you do it.

If you manage to hack his computer then the semantics make no real
difference.

Franklin

[Ron]

On May 14, 1:52 am, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2008 21:39:29 -0700 (PDT), Ron <BigELil...@msn.com>
> wrote:
>
> >You said "SyGate is a security disaster" but yet you can't hack my
> >computer....how come, genius?
>
> You seem to have forgotten exactly what I said to you.

I didn't forget anything...........

"SyGate is a security disaster - but you most likely wouldn't care."
>
> >Backup your claim that "SyGate is a security disaster", somehow,
> >someway.
>
> Just look at the technical design which ignores the most basic
> security recommendations of Microsoft. Add to that the unfixed bugs
> that won't be fixed because you're running an unsupported piece of
> crap.

Hack my computer. (this isn't a question, BTW)

[Ron]

On May 14, 3:53 pm, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 12:17:46 -0700 (PDT), Ron <BigELil...@msn.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On May 14, 1:52 am, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 12 May 2008 21:39:29 -0700 (PDT), Ron <BigELil...@msn.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >You said "SyGate is a security disaster" but yet you can't hack my
> >> >computer....how come, genius?
>
> >> You seem to have forgotten exactly what I said to you.
>
> >I didn't forget anything...........
>
> >"SyGate is a security disaster - but you most likely wouldn't care."
>
> >> >Backup your claim that "SyGate is a security disaster", somehow,
> >> >someway.
>
> >> Just look at the technical design which ignores the most basic
> >> security recommendations of Microsoft. Add to that the unfixed bugs
> >> that won't be fixed because you're running an unsupported piece of
> >> crap.
>
> >Hack my computer. (this isn't a question, BTW)
>
> I see you ran out of arguments....

The only "argument" is you saying that "SyGate is a security
disaster", backup your claim by hacking my computer.

[Ron]

On May 14, 4:11 pm, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 13:04:26 -0700 (PDT), Ron <BigELil...@msn.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On May 14, 3:53 pm, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 14 May 2008 12:17:46 -0700 (PDT), Ron <BigELil...@msn.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On May 14, 1:52 am, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 12 May 2008 21:39:29 -0700 (PDT), Ron <BigELil...@msn.com>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >You said "SyGate is a security disaster" but yet you can't hack my
> >> >> >computer....how come, genius?
>
> >> >> You seem to have forgotten exactly what I said to you.
>
> >> >I didn't forget anything...........
>
> >> >"SyGate is a security disaster - but you most likely wouldn't care."
>
> >> >> >Backup your claim that "SyGate is a security disaster", somehow,
> >> >> >someway.
>
> >> >> Just look at the technical design which ignores the most basic
> >> >> security recommendations of Microsoft. Add to that the unfixed bugs
> >> >> that won't be fixed because you're running an unsupported piece of
> >> >> crap.
>
> >> >Hack my computer. (this isn't a question, BTW)
>
> >> I see you ran out of arguments....
>
> >The only "argument" is you saying that "SyGate is a security
> >disaster", backup your claim by hacking my computer.
>
> You simply don't get it...

And you simply can't hack my computer...lol

[§]

Ron wrote:
> On May 14, 4:11 pm, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> You simply don't get it...
>
> And you simply can't hack my computer...lol

Of course he can't hack your computer, but it has little to do with
Sygate.

You need hak0r skills to hack a PC

[louise]

jen wrote:
> "louise" <louise@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:68pt0bF2tnktkU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Kayman wrote:
>>> On Fri, 09 May 2008 21:58:57 GMT, Poky wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 09 May 2008 04:30:45 GMT, Straight Talk
>>>> <b__nice@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Better to avoid installing malware in the first place (it's
>>>>> actually
>>>>> not that hard).
>>>> So how do you post here since you unplugged your PC from the
>>>> internet?
>>> It's not to difficult to do, Poky
>>> Security software manufacturers tend to overstate their product
>>> description
>>> to instill fear and uncertainty; After all it's all about the $
>>> almighty.
>>> Please step back and try to remove the advertisement hype from your
>>> mind.
>>> In WinXP the most dependable defenses are:
>>> 1. Do not work as 'Administrator'; For day-to-day work routinely use
>>> a
>>> Limited User Account (LUA).
>>> 2. Secure (Harden) your operating system (OS).
>>> 3. Keep your OS and all software on it updated/patched.
>>> 4. Reconsider the usage of MSIE and MSOE.
>>> 5. Review your installed 3rd party software applications/utilities;
>>> Remove clutter.
>>> 6. Don't expose services to public networks.
>>> 7. Activate the in-build firewall and configure Windows not to use
>>> TCP/IP as transport protocol for NetBIOS, SMB and RPC, thus
>>> leaving TCP/UDP ports 135,137-139 and 445 (the most exploited Windows
>>> networking weak point) closed. 7a. If on high-speed internet use a
>>> router as well.
>>> 8. Routinely practice safe-hex.
>>> 9. Regularly back-up data/files.
>>> 10. Familiarize yourself with crash recovery tools and re-installing
>>> your OS.
>>> 11. Utilize a real-time anti-virus (AV) application and vital system
>>> monitoring utilities/applications.
>>> 12. Keep abreast of latest developments - Sh!t happens...you know.
>>> The least preferred defenses are:
>>> Myriads of popular anti-whatever things and staying ignorant.
>>> Educational Reading: Security @ home
>>> http://home20.inet.tele.dk/b_nice/index.htm
>> I'm running XP SP2, using cable internet access with a router.
>> Could you explain how to do: "configure Windows not to use
>> TCP/IP as transport protocol for NetBIOS, SMB and RPC, thus leaving
>> TCP/UDP ports 135,137-139 and 445 (the most exploited Windows
>> networking weak point) closed. "
>> I don't know how to go about making the above happen.
>
> Seconfig XP:
> * A free tool to close (not just shield) most exploited Windows security
> holes.
> * Can close ports 135, 137-139, 445, 1025 (used by file and printer
> sharing, Windows domains, other Microsoft Networks access and widely
> exploited by worms, hackers etc.), 1900, 5000 (used by UPnP) and
> other...
> * Can disable most dangerous Windows services.
> * Can protect Windows side against most ARP spoofing/poisoning attacks.
> * Can configure many other hidden security related Windows TCP/IP
> settings.
> * Works only with registry (no files, services, drivers etc.).
> * Includes three easy to use presets for average home (standalone)
> computers, Microsoft Networks members and standalone computers with VPN
> client access to Microsoft Networks.
> * Certified to be malware free by Softpedia.
> http://seconfig.sytes.net/
>
> -jen
>
>
Thanks - I'm looking at it right now.

Louise

[louise]

jen wrote:
> "louise" <louise@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:68pt0bF2tnktkU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Kayman wrote:
>>> On Fri, 09 May 2008 21:58:57 GMT, Poky wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 09 May 2008 04:30:45 GMT, Straight Talk
>>>> <b__nice@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Better to avoid installing malware in the first place (it's
>>>>> actually
>>>>> not that hard).
>>>> So how do you post here since you unplugged your PC from the
>>>> internet?
>>> It's not to difficult to do, Poky
>>> Security software manufacturers tend to overstate their product
>>> description
>>> to instill fear and uncertainty; After all it's all about the $
>>> almighty.
>>> Please step back and try to remove the advertisement hype from your
>>> mind.
>>> In WinXP the most dependable defenses are:
>>> 1. Do not work as 'Administrator'; For day-to-day work routinely use
>>> a
>>> Limited User Account (LUA).
>>> 2. Secure (Harden) your operating system (OS).
>>> 3. Keep your OS and all software on it updated/patched.
>>> 4. Reconsider the usage of MSIE and MSOE.
>>> 5. Review your installed 3rd party software applications/utilities;
>>> Remove clutter.
>>> 6. Don't expose services to public networks.
>>> 7. Activate the in-build firewall and configure Windows not to use
>>> TCP/IP as transport protocol for NetBIOS, SMB and RPC, thus
>>> leaving TCP/UDP ports 135,137-139 and 445 (the most exploited Windows
>>> networking weak point) closed. 7a. If on high-speed internet use a
>>> router as well.
>>> 8. Routinely practice safe-hex.
>>> 9. Regularly back-up data/files.
>>> 10. Familiarize yourself with crash recovery tools and re-installing
>>> your OS.
>>> 11. Utilize a real-time anti-virus (AV) application and vital system
>>> monitoring utilities/applications.
>>> 12. Keep abreast of latest developments - Sh!t happens...you know.
>>> The least preferred defenses are:
>>> Myriads of popular anti-whatever things and staying ignorant.
>>> Educational Reading: Security @ home
>>> http://home20.inet.tele.dk/b_nice/index.htm
>> I'm running XP SP2, using cable internet access with a router.
>> Could you explain how to do: "configure Windows not to use
>> TCP/IP as transport protocol for NetBIOS, SMB and RPC, thus leaving
>> TCP/UDP ports 135,137-139 and 445 (the most exploited Windows
>> networking weak point) closed. "
>> I don't know how to go about making the above happen.
>
> Seconfig XP:
> * A free tool to close (not just shield) most exploited Windows security
> holes.
> * Can close ports 135, 137-139, 445, 1025 (used by file and printer
> sharing, Windows domains, other Microsoft Networks access and widely
> exploited by worms, hackers etc.), 1900, 5000 (used by UPnP) and
> other...
> * Can disable most dangerous Windows services.
> * Can protect Windows side against most ARP spoofing/poisoning attacks.
> * Can configure many other hidden security related Windows TCP/IP
> settings.
> * Works only with registry (no files, services, drivers etc.).
> * Includes three easy to use presets for average home (standalone)
> computers, Microsoft Networks members and standalone computers with VPN
> client access to Microsoft Networks.
> * Certified to be malware free by Softpedia.
> http://seconfig.sytes.net/
>
> -jen
>
>
Looking at the program. I use gotomypc.com which
essentially allows me to access my pc from any computer
anywhere in the world as long as it is turned on.

Do you know whether one or more of the settings in seconfig
would affect this?

Thanks again.

Louise

[Ron]

On May 14, 4:22 pm, § <td...@foadspammer.com> wrote:
> Ron wrote:
> > On May 14, 4:11 pm, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> You simply don't get it...
>
> > And you simply can't hack my computer...lol
>
> Of course he can't hack your computer, but it has little to do with
> Sygate.
>
> You need hak0r skills to hack a PC

This is kinda my point, for a HOME PC Sygate works just fine.

I'm running W2K, so I have to use something, but for most people with
newer OS's, the Microsoft FW is just fine for home use.

Of course I'm sure Mr Straight Talk will discredit that also.

[§]

Ron wrote:
> On May 14, 4:22 pm, § <td...@foadspammer.com> wrote:
>> Ron wrote:
>>> On May 14, 4:11 pm, Straight Talk <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> You simply don't get it...
>>> And you simply can't hack my computer...lol
>> Of course he can't hack your computer, but it has little to do with
>> Sygate.
>>
>> You need hak0r skills to hack a PC
>
> This is kinda my point, for a HOME PC Sygate works just fine.
>
> I'm running W2K, so I have to use something, but for most people with
> newer OS's, the Microsoft FW is just fine for home use.

Actually w2k does have some pretty good protection in it's own right.

Check out; http://homepages.wmich.edu/~mchugha/w2kfirewall.htm

Much better than what any 3rd party sw *firewall* has to offer.

>
> Of course I'm sure Mr Straight Talk will discredit that also.
>

Doubtful. The built in XP firewall works well enough, for a sw
*firewall*, that is.

If your on a some form of broadband, then your on a network. Protecting
the network is where the focus should be.