Prev: Firefox autodial
Next: Firefox is already running....
From: John Thompson on 31 Mar 2007 18:00
On 2007-03-31, businessman(a)nomail.com <businessman(a)nomail.com> wrote:

> Yes, i have heard of Linux and yes, I even tried it once. That was
> about 10 years ago.

Linux has changed considerably in the last 10 years. There are even many
"live CDs" that allow you to boot and use linux without installing
anything on your HD.


> I had run dos, win3.x, win95, and OS2. I was
> able to use all of them. Then I tried Linux. My instant reaction was
> "what a POS". I want to USE my computer. I want to use standard
> software that I can buy or download and is compatible with the rest of
> the world, and I DO NOT want to spend my whole life in front of my
> computer trying to tinker with the OS.

What type of compatibility do you need? Firefox/Thunderbird give you
state of the art web browsing and email, OpenOffice.org gives you a
full-featured MS-Office compatible office software suite, gimp provides
versatile image editing capabilities, &etc.

> Windows has it's flaws, but it works and dont need constant
> attention.

Really? What about the continuous need to update malware protection,
"Patch Tuesday" and so on?

You really ought to try one of the live CDs other people here have
recommended, anyway.

--

John (john(a)os2.dhs.org)
From: John Thompson on 31 Mar 2007 18:15
On 2007-03-31, businessman(a)nomail.com <businessman(a)nomail.com> wrote:

> Aside from all of this, I have still not found anyone on here that
> actually has any factual information about browser security. Does
> such data exist?

Secunia is as impartial a site for this information as I've found:

http://secunia.com/

They cover much more than just browser vulnerabilities, though.

The SANS Internet Storm Center diary is also good:
http://isc.sans.org/diary.html

--

John (john(a)os2.dhs.org)
From: John Thompson on 31 Mar 2007 18:18
On 2007-03-31, Zaghadka <zaghadka(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

> That said, IE is perfectly safe for the average user, when used *only* to go to
> known trusted sites.

The only site for which IE should be used is the Windows Update site,
and even then only because you have no other choice.

--

John (john(a)os2.dhs.org)
From: businessman on 30 Mar 2007 20:54
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 20:44:31 GMT, Zaghadka <zaghadka(a)hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 14:13:00 -0500, in alt.fan.mozilla, businessman(a)nomail.com
>wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>I
>>have a life outside of my computer.
>
>As do I. ;^)
>
>Your reply has little to do with browser security, however. If you came here to
>bash Linux, you came to the wrong group. Go to a Linux group, pick a distro,
>and talk about it, and they will be able to tell you about what is wrong with
>their implementation of Linux, and Linux in general, because there is plenty.
>
>I will say that the underlying security model in Linux is better than that of
>Windows, and that's why Windows has all those Admin context exploits on it.
>When a software developer doesn't have the sense to keep the cursor rendering,
>or the JPEG rendering, or Windows Metafile *rendering* out of the ROOT/Admin
>context, anything can happen. ;^)
>
>Windows has had exploits, both in GUI Plus (JPEG exploit), WMFs (backdoor), and
>cursor rendering (arbitrary code launch) that will allow an attacker to take
>control of your system. In other words, in Windows, you can get rooted just by
>viewing a picture.
>
>And don't get me started about the OS contexts in Windows that even *allow*
>something like a "rootkit" to exist in the first place.
>
>So are you sure about your choice of OS and how "easy" it is to operate, or are
>you simply ignorant and lulled into a *false* sense of security?
>
>Good, I'm glad you think you've made the right choice. But don't click on any
>phishing links in your emails, if you can tell the difference, because your
>choice is going to get your box zombied if you're not careful, and it may have
>nothing to do with your choice of *browser*.
>
>Sony would've rootkitted your machine just for autorunning a CD.
>
>I run Windows XP as my primary OS as well, and it takes a *lot* of time and
>work to secure it properly. It is, to my mind, no "easier" than Linux, and
>certainly more dangerous.

You are right. I did not come here to bash Linux. I did not bring it
up either. I dont think I was bashing it when I said I want nothing
to do with it. I'll leave it for the high school crowd, which seems to
be where it gets used the most.

And for the record I dont click on ANY links in my email, in fact I
use a text only Win3.x email software and that is all I will ever use.
Outlook Express is pure garbage. In fact of all the Microsoft
software, I consider OE to be the worst of the worst. I completely
deleted it from my drive. I use email to communicate, not to look at
stupid and irritating smiley faces that dance around my screen. HTML
email is purely assenine.

Now back to determining which browser is the most secure !!!!
From: Leonidas Jones on 31 Mar 2007 23:18
Tony Raven wrote:
> Leonidas Jones wrote on 31/03/2007 03:03 +0100:
>> SteveG wrote:
>>> businessman(a)nomail.com wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:05:11 +0000 (UTC), john sumner
>>>> <josumner1965(a)cs.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> businessman(a)nomail.com wrote in
>>>>> news:e12q039kquehgge27c27f6h8dabjof94lv(a)4ax.com:
/snip/

> Or maybe its shorthand for "validate and verify" ;-)
>


You know, that could be a useful word!! ;)

Lee
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Prev: Firefox autodial
Next: Firefox is already running....