Freeware to view hidden registry entries.
in [Freeware]
|
From: za kAT on 10 Apr 2010 12:04 On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 18:40:58 +0200, B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson wrote: > Operating systems are too complex, nowadays, to manually check for > vague symptoms. When there are reasons to mistrust a setup, it is > better to do a clean re-install and just copy the data... Assuming 'whatever' isn't hidden in the data... > You doubtlessly knew this, already. Ditto. -- zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - www.zakATsKopterChat.com
From: B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson on 10 Apr 2010 14:01 On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 17:04:32 +0100, za kAT wrote: >> When there are reasons to mistrust a setup, it is better to do a clean >> re-install and just copy the data... > > Assuming 'whatever' isn't hidden in the data... As long as there is no trigger mechanism (trojan, software bug) left or comes new onto the system, one is pretty safe from "whatever" that is hidden in the data... ;-) Btw., if one wishes to retain a software [freeware, of course ;-) ] archive after a clean install following an (assumed) security breach, the /least/ security measure should be to wait a couple of weeks before running /any/ software from that archive. All archived programs ought to be scanned by at least one trustworthy up-to-date AV program at this point. If one needs a couple of programs earlier, they should be installed as fresh downloads from the Net. (Checksum comparison will also suffice, of course.) Again, most people know this. Yet few really follow this path... BeAr -- =========================================================================== = What do you mean with: "Perfection is always an illusion"? = ===============================================================--(Oops!)===
From: za kAT on 10 Apr 2010 13:43 On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 20:01:27 +0200, B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson wrote: > On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 17:04:32 +0100, za kAT wrote: > >>> When there are reasons to mistrust a setup, it is better to do a clean >>> re-install and just copy the data... >> >> Assuming 'whatever' isn't hidden in the data... > > As long as there is no trigger mechanism (trojan, software bug) left > or comes new onto the system, one is pretty safe from "whatever" that > is hidden in the data... ;-) John seems concerned about 'whatever' could have been hidden in the registry. I can't see hiding 'whatever' in the data, presents a real problem either. I'm assuming 'whatever' refers to confidential data, not malware. > Btw., if one wishes to retain a software [freeware, of course ;-) ] > archive after a clean install following an (assumed) security breach, > the /least/ security measure should be to wait a couple of weeks before > running /any/ software from that archive. > > All archived programs ought to be scanned by at least one trustworthy > up-to-date AV program at this point. Yep, or preferably from a clean backup. > Again, most people know this. Yet few really follow this path... I'd say 60-70% of people have evolved inner ear flaps which close whenever backups are discussed. -- zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - www.zakATsKopterChat.com
From: B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson on 10 Apr 2010 15:24 On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 18:43:51 +0100, za kAT wrote: > John seems concerned about 'whatever' could have been hidden in the > registry. I can't see hiding 'whatever' in the data, presents a real > problem either. "Whatever" in the data on a potentially compromised system /can/ be a thread or a breach of the secrecy of personal data, though. As you write further on: > I'm assuming 'whatever' refers to confidential data, not malware. Or traces of malware running undetected. (Because of missing detection in AV software or very sophisticated concealment.) Presence of hidden data in registry usually points either to obsessive attempts to protect some intellectual property or to spyware/malware. BeAr -- =========================================================================== = What do you mean with: "Perfection is always an illusion"? = ===============================================================--(Oops!)===
From: B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson on 10 Apr 2010 15:27
Following myself up: > thread ^ Hmph. Make this "threat" :-( BeAr -- =========================================================================== = What do you mean with: "Perfection is always an illusion"? = ===============================================================--(Oops!)=== |