|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143367 is a reply to message #143366] |
Wed, 20 December 2006 19:00   |
Craig Taylor
Messages: 177
Registered: June 2005
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
(ProteanThread) wrote:
> this list is pretty old:
>
> http://www.q-link.cc/cbm-discussion.shtml
>
> what's (and link to) the most popular and or best email list about
> commdore and CBM / PET computers (not just vic 20 or C64/128) ?
I'm not sure there is such as list... We could use that one as a
starting point however...
Anyone know if the items on the list are still accurate? I can vounch
for the CBM Hackers list. Not sure of any of the others.
- Craig Taylor
http://www.ctalkobt.net
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143368 is a reply to message #143367] |
Wed, 20 December 2006 19:09 |
|
|
Originally posted by: proteanthread
would you object if i created one (or another one) ? it wouldn't be on
yahoo, google, aol, or msn. would you subscribe ?
Craig Taylor wrote:
> (ProteanThread) wrote:
>> this list is pretty old:
>>
>> http://www.q-link.cc/cbm-discussion.shtml
>>
>> what's (and link to) the most popular and or best email list about
>> commdore and CBM / PET computers (not just vic 20 or C64/128) ?
>
> I'm not sure there is such as list... We could use that one as a
> starting point however...
>
> Anyone know if the items on the list are still accurate? I can vounch
> for the CBM Hackers list. Not sure of any of the others.
>
> - Craig Taylor
> http://www.ctalkobt.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143371 is a reply to message #143368] |
Wed, 20 December 2006 20:16 |
Craig Taylor
Messages: 177
Registered: June 2005
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
(ProteanThread) wrote:
> would you object if i created one (or another one) ? it wouldn't be on
> yahoo, google, aol, or msn. would you subscribe ?
>
>
> Craig Taylor wrote:
>> I'm not sure there is such as list... We could use that one as a
>> starting point however...
No, I wasn't suggesting on starting another distribution list - merely
start / re-create a list of CBM / Pet Computer mailing lists - the list
of lists in other words.
- Craig Taylor
http://www.ctalkobt.net
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143372 is a reply to message #143371] |
Wed, 20 December 2006 22:31 |
|
|
Originally posted by: proteanthread
isnt' there an FAQ for the group which has all this information (one
that is at least updated)?
Craig Taylor wrote:
> (ProteanThread) wrote:
>> would you object if i created one (or another one) ? it wouldn't be on
>> yahoo, google, aol, or msn. would you subscribe ?
>>
>>
>> Craig Taylor wrote:
>>> I'm not sure there is such as list... We could use that one as a
>>> starting point however...
>
> No, I wasn't suggesting on starting another distribution list - merely
> start / re-create a list of CBM / Pet Computer mailing lists - the list
> of lists in other words.
>
> - Craig Taylor
> http://www.ctalkobt.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143376 is a reply to message #143375] |
Fri, 22 December 2006 16:04 |
Anders Carlsson
Messages: 776
Registered: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"(ProteanThread)" <proteanthread@gmail.com> writes:
> what do you guys suggest ?
About which list you should join, or whether you should start one
more general Commodore topic list? The most important factor when
you run a list is to have a readership that have something to add.
If most of the remaining Commodore enthusiasts already are on other
mailing lists, web forums and discussion groups, I think it will be
hard to convince them why they should join one more list if they can
get in touch with eachother already. It is a different matter if you
have a particular topic to be disussed on a list, e.g. if you develop
a new operating system on the C64 and create a list for developers and
users of that OS.
--
Anders Carlsson
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143377 is a reply to message #143376] |
Fri, 22 December 2006 18:09 |
Joseph Fenn
Messages: 373
Registered: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 22 Dec 2006, Anders Carlsson wrote:
> "(ProteanThread)" <proteanthread@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> what do you guys suggest ?
>
> About which list you should join, or whether you should start one
> more general Commodore topic list? The most important factor when
> you run a list is to have a readership that have something to add.
> If most of the remaining Commodore enthusiasts already are on other
> mailing lists, web forums and discussion groups, I think it will be
> hard to convince them why they should join one more list if they can
> get in touch with eachother already. It is a different matter if you
> have a particular topic to be disussed on a list, e.g. if you develop
> a new operating system on the C64 and create a list for developers and
> users of that OS.
>
> --
> Anders Carlsson
>
Again I suggest you go to "mailink@videocam.net.au" and your will
see the entire MUTTM (CBM users thru the mail) list. It will
cost you $15 a year, but you will receive a bulletin every quarter
which contains all kinds of info such as little known trix of
basic and m/l. Also free buy/sell lists which any member can use.
Our membership is about 100 or more and we have members from
Canada to Argentina in that list. I'Ve been a member now for
about 15 years. I also maintain the MUTTM membership email addr
list from here. Did I mention that it cost $20 for foreign
country members. Wo welcome aboard. If you have more questions
send a email to gaelyne@videocam.net.au.
Joe "editor of MUTTM email addr list".
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143379 is a reply to message #143377] |
Fri, 22 December 2006 22:12 |
|
|
Originally posted by: proteanthread
only 100 or so? is the CBM community dead ?
Joseph Fenn wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Dec 2006, Anders Carlsson wrote:
>
>> "(ProteanThread)" <proteanthread@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> what do you guys suggest ?
>>
>> About which list you should join, or whether you should start one
>> more general Commodore topic list? The most important factor when
>> you run a list is to have a readership that have something to add.
>> If most of the remaining Commodore enthusiasts already are on other
>> mailing lists, web forums and discussion groups, I think it will be
>> hard to convince them why they should join one more list if they can
>> get in touch with eachother already. It is a different matter if you
>> have a particular topic to be disussed on a list, e.g. if you develop
>> a new operating system on the C64 and create a list for developers and
>> users of that OS.
>>
>> --
>> Anders Carlsson
>>
> Again I suggest you go to "mailink@videocam.net.au" and your will
> see the entire MUTTM (CBM users thru the mail) list. It will
> cost you $15 a year, but you will receive a bulletin every quarter
> which contains all kinds of info such as little known trix of
> basic and m/l. Also free buy/sell lists which any member can use.
> Our membership is about 100 or more and we have members from
> Canada to Argentina in that list. I'Ve been a member now for
> about 15 years. I also maintain the MUTTM membership email addr
> list from here. Did I mention that it cost $20 for foreign
> country members. Wo welcome aboard. If you have more questions
> send a email to gaelyne@videocam.net.au.
> Joe "editor of MUTTM email addr list".
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143380 is a reply to message #143376] |
Sat, 23 December 2006 11:00 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Nate Breen
I don't see any problem with starting another list. Hell, it just
means more choices and another site for the Commie and these new sites
might help keep the C128 alive (my first commodore).
Go for it PT.
Anders Carlsson wrote:
> "(ProteanThread)" <proteanthread@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> what do you guys suggest ?
>
> About which list you should join, or whether you should start one
> more general Commodore topic list? The most important factor when
> you run a list is to have a readership that have something to add.
> If most of the remaining Commodore enthusiasts already are on other
> mailing lists, web forums and discussion groups, I think it will be
> hard to convince them why they should join one more list if they can
> get in touch with eachother already. It is a different matter if you
> have a particular topic to be disussed on a list, e.g. if you develop
> a new operating system on the C64 and create a list for developers and
> users of that OS.
>
> --
> Anders Carlsson
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143381 is a reply to message #143379] |
Sat, 23 December 2006 19:01 |
Joseph Fenn
Messages: 373
Registered: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Well Commodore aint entirely dead yet. I use mine on the internet
to avoid buying new virus software every few months. I am typeing
this to you on a commodore-128. I have 5 pc laptops of which none
have ever seen the "hellish virus stuff" that might injure them.
They are just good for playing Solitaire and listening to good
music.
Joe
************************************************************ **************
* Ham since 1937 HiSchool Sophomore ex W9ZUU, KP4EX, W4FAG, KH6ARG KH6JF *
* WW2 Vet since Sep 1940 to just After VJ day. US Signal Corps AACS *
************************************************************ **************
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143382 is a reply to message #143381] |
Sat, 23 December 2006 20:50 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Joseph Fenn wrote on 23. December 2006:
>
> Well Commodore aint entirely dead yet. I use mine on the internet
> to avoid buying new virus software every few months.
One reason I run Linux.
> I am typeing this to you on a commodore-128.
Cool. TCP/IP connected or kind of FIDO gate (cannot figure out from your
header, seems like an ordinary NNTP server, so TCP/IP)? From your
Message-Id it looks like you use PINE.
> I have 5 pc laptops of which none have ever seen the "hellish virus
> stuff" that might injure them. They are just good for playing
> Solitaire and listening to good music. Joe
I like SID music. :-)
--
Andreas
Ankman's SID homepage at http://people.freenet.de/ankman/sid.html
|
|
|
|
| VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143383 is a reply to message #143382] |
Sun, 24 December 2006 00:03 |
Joseph Fenn
Messages: 373
Registered: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Yep Linux is good I am told. Virus creators get no satisfaction
in screwing up a few thousand MACS and LINUX is a good way to
get out of the crowd that gets hit in the face. In fact those
guys that do bad things have even been able to get into the
FEDS data banks like that guy in the Phillipine did a few years
ago. My C128 is worry free and yep I am useing LYNX browser,
PINE email, and a CSHELL. Thank god there are a few shells
left to do the job. UNIX is great.
Joe
************************************************************ **************
* Ham since 1937 HiSchool Sophomore ex W9ZUU, KP4EX, W4FAG, KH6ARG KH6JF *
* WW2 Vet since Sep 1940 to just After VJ day. US Signal Corps AACS *
************************************************************ **************
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143385 is a reply to message #143383] |
Sun, 24 December 2006 13:27 |
Payton Byrd
Messages: 1198
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is just purely irrational dribble. I've been using Windows for many, many years with many, many PCs and I haven't had a Virus since the days of Windows 98. Perhaps if you were to use a modern, secure version of Windows, especially XP SP2, you would not have to be so paranoid. And by the way, there are multiple completely free Virus scanners for Windows that work quite well.
I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
"Joseph Fenn" <jfenn@lava.net> wrote in message news:Pine.BSI.4.61.0612231857310.10483@malasada.lava.net...
> Yep Linux is good I am told. Virus creators get no satisfaction
> in screwing up a few thousand MACS and LINUX is a good way to
> get out of the crowd that gets hit in the face. In fact those
> guys that do bad things have even been able to get into the
> FEDS data banks like that guy in the Phillipine did a few years
> ago. My C128 is worry free and yep I am useing LYNX browser,
> PINE email, and a CSHELL. Thank god there are a few shells
> left to do the job. UNIX is great.
> Joe
>
> ************************************************************ **************
> * Ham since 1937 HiSchool Sophomore ex W9ZUU, KP4EX, W4FAG, KH6ARG KH6JF *
> * WW2 Vet since Sep 1940 to just After VJ day. US Signal Corps AACS *
> ************************************************************ **************
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143386 is a reply to message #143385] |
Sun, 24 December 2006 14:32 |
winston19842005@yahoo
Messages: 180
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Payton Byrd wrote:
> This is just purely irrational dribble. I've been using Windows for many, many years with many, many PCs and I haven't had a Virus since the days of Windows 98. Perhaps if you were to use a modern, secure version of Windows, especially XP SP2, you would not have to be so paranoid. And by the way, there are multiple completely free Virus scanners for Windows that work quite well.
>
> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
However, because Windows 98 (95 and Me) are so old, there are less
viruses targeted for those releases. Like you, I haven't had a virus in
several years (I'm running Me - would be Win98SE, but GRUB took it out
during a Linux install - yes, I run FC5 Linux but am looking at
Slackware right now, need a more "stable" flavor of Linux).
Spyware is more of a problem, and even that depends on where you surf
mostly. I usually just end up with tracking cookies is all.
I run AVG Free, Spybot and Adaware, but there are many good free
choices it seems. Firewalls are a must (currently running Agnitum, when
ZoneAlarm's update downloads grew to 10mb and I'm on a slow dial-up).
Agnitum doesn't have updates, though (they upgrade you to the "try
until you pay" if you try an update). This is why I do most surfing on
Linux...
For Linux, I don't run anything, except the built-in firewall. The
underlying security built-in to the filesystem is beautiful.
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143387 is a reply to message #143386] |
Sun, 24 December 2006 17:20 |
Joseph Fenn
Messages: 373
Registered: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I agree with you. All the old 8bit machines could care less about
virus' and you chose a low probability of getting a virus with
Linux. I have winxp/pro so the best alternative to virus
software and upgrades every few months is frequent
image backups that get you back in business in a few minutes.
Joe
************************************************************ **************
* Ham since 1937 HiSchool Sophomore ex W9ZUU, KP4EX, W4FAG, KH6ARG KH6JF *
* WW2 Vet since Sep 1940 to just After VJ day. US Signal Corps AACS *
************************************************************ **************
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143388 is a reply to message #143387] |
Sun, 24 December 2006 17:55 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Dopple
99% of the viruses around rely on some type of social engineering in order to
get in someones system.
The average computer user is easier to trick nowadays.
This all leads back to my theory of finite computer knowledge.
-Jay
Joseph Fenn wrote:
> I agree with you. All the old 8bit machines could care less about
> virus' and you chose a low probability of getting a virus with
> Linux. I have winxp/pro so the best alternative to virus
> software and upgrades every few months is frequent
> image backups that get you back in business in a few minutes.
> Joe
>
>
> ************************************************************ **************
> * Ham since 1937 HiSchool Sophomore ex W9ZUU, KP4EX, W4FAG, KH6ARG KH6JF *
> * WW2 Vet since Sep 1940 to just After VJ day. US Signal Corps AACS *
> ************************************************************ **************
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: commodore email list [message #143389 is a reply to message #143379] |
Sun, 24 December 2006 17:59 |
Anders Carlsson
Messages: 776
Registered: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"(ProteanThread)" <proteanthread@gmail.com> writes:
>> MUTTM (CBM users thru the mail) list. It will cost you $15 a year,
>> Did I mention that it cost $20 for foreign country members.
> only 100 or so? is the CBM community dead ?
No, but the rest of us don't see any added benefit in paying $20 to
get a newsletter four times a year and be part of a mailing list.
--
Anders Carlsson
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143390 is a reply to message #143385] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 19:42 |
Clockmeister
Messages: 1444
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Payton Byrd" <plbyrd@bellsouth.no.spam.net> wrote in message
news:NDzjh.10305$h_1.5828@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
This is just purely irrational dribble. I've been using Windows for many,
many years with many, many PCs and I haven't had a Virus since the days of
Windows 98. Perhaps if you were to use a modern, secure version of Windows,
especially XP SP2, you would not have to be so paranoid. And by the way,
there are multiple completely free Virus scanners for Windows that work
quite well.
I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad
thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick of
is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based on 10
year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
100% correct.
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143392 is a reply to message #143385] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 21:23 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Payton Byrd wrote on 24. December 2006:
>
> This is just purely irrational dribble. I've been using Windows for many, many years with many, many PCs and I haven't had a Virus since the days of Windows 98. Perhaps if you were to use a modern, secure version of Windows, especially XP SP2, you would not have to be so paranoid. And by the way, there are multiple completely free Virus scanners for Windows that work quite well.
I wonder if all "Bot net members" who send me spam use W2000 or older then?
> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
It's mainly, as already said, social engineering. Also miss configured
computers and use of broken software.
Though I use Linux I set up several Windows (2000 that is) computers. No
firewall or, NAT router or anything needed if you know what you do. And
they are all alive since years.
--
Andreas
Ankman's SID homepage at http://people.freenet.de/ankman/sid.html
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143393 is a reply to message #143390] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 21:50 |
Sam Gillett
Messages: 2422
Registered: June 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Clockmeister" wrote ...
>
> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad
> thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick
> of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based
> on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
Today's reality? Let's see now. In the last couple of years I have had
dozens of viruses sent to me in email, and recently there have been several
attempts to install trojans while I have been online.
Today's reality is that people still need anti-virus, anti-trojan, and
anti-spyware programs. And they need to update their definitions frequently
(or automatically with some programs).
--
Best regards,
Sam Gillett
Change is inevitable,
except from vending machines!
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143521 is a reply to message #143393] |
Tue, 26 December 2006 06:13 |
Clockmeister
Messages: 1444
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:J50kh.7119$Rc5.4436@trnddc01...
>
> "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>
>> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad
>> thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick
>> of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based
>> on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
>
> Today's reality? Let's see now. In the last couple of years I have had
> dozens of viruses sent to me in email, and recently there have been
> several attempts to install trojans while I have been online.
You need to improve your basic security methods. All I use is hardware
firewall, AVG, SP2, Stopzilla and the occasional scan with Spyware S&D
(which very rarely finds anything but a tracker cookie) and I haven't had a
virus/spyware/worms whatever for years.
> Today's reality is that people still need anti-virus, anti-trojan, and
> anti-spyware programs. And they need to update their definitions
> frequently (or automatically with some programs).
> --
And? This isn't a problem and a small price to pay for the convienience of
using a well supported, fully featured OS.
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143522 is a reply to message #143390] |
Tue, 26 December 2006 15:10 |
Joseph Fenn
Messages: 373
Registered: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Dec 2006, Clockmeister wrote:
>
> "Payton Byrd" <plbyrd@bellsouth.no.spam.net> wrote in message
> news:NDzjh.10305$h_1.5828@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> This is just purely irrational dribble. I've been using Windows for many,
> many years with many, many PCs and I haven't had a Virus since the days of
> Windows 98. Perhaps if you were to use a modern, secure version of Windows,
> especially XP SP2, you would not have to be so paranoid. And by the way,
> there are multiple completely free Virus scanners for Windows that work
> quite well.
>
> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad
> thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick of
> is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based on 10
> year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
>
>
> 100% correct.
DONT WORRY. amuthing that is writeable to the mbr can and will be done
even to the XP and VISTA programs. Just wait and see
Joe (a C128 user)
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143523 is a reply to message #143521] |
Tue, 26 December 2006 15:25 |
Joseph Fenn
Messages: 373
Registered: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Dec 2006, Clockmeister wrote:
>
> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
> news:J50kh.7119$Rc5.4436@trnddc01...
>>
>> "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>>
>>> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad
>>> thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick
>>> of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based
>>> on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
>>
>> Today's reality? Let's see now. In the last couple of years I have had
>> dozens of viruses sent to me in email, and recently there have been
>> several attempts to install trojans while I have been online.
>
> You need to improve your basic security methods. All I use is hardware
> firewall, AVG, SP2, Stopzilla and the occasional scan with Spyware S&D
> (which very rarely finds anything but a tracker cookie) and I haven't had a
> virus/spyware/worms whatever for years.
>
>> Today's reality is that people still need anti-virus, anti-trojan, and
>> anti-spyware programs. And they need to update their definitions
>> frequently (or automatically with some programs).
>> --
>
> And? This isn't a problem and a small price to pay for the convienience of
> using a well supported, fully featured OS.
And I still say the virus creators are or will be working on VISTA
soon as it appears. These nuts believe in damaging the most computers
in the world that they can reach. That one kid in Phillipines
created one that went right into our USA govt files a few years ago,
and the Govt is supposed tp have he most solid virus preventor software
scheme in the world so what can I say.
Joe
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143524 is a reply to message #143393] |
Tue, 26 December 2006 20:31 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Sam Gillett wrote on 25. December 2006:
>
> Today's reality is that people still need anti-virus, anti-trojan, and
> anti-spyware programs. And they need to update their definitions frequently
> (or automatically with some programs).
Not really. They "need" it if their brains fail. But won't really work
for them.
Virus programs might make sense if you scan files which are so old that
an up to date definition would know them. There are websites you can
upload a suspicious file and they will scan it with some famous virus
scanners. If the malware in that file is too new you will see that some
of them will fail to detect the malware, others might. So if you have the
"wrong" scanner yourself you're out of luck.
Anti-trojan and anti-spyware programs do not work, as if you are infected
and were administrator (unfortunately most Windows users are) you cannot
clean a compromised computer. Because you have backdoors and so remote
access for others. You cannot find everything (same as for new viruses
and the failure of the scanners). So if failing here the backdoor is back
and more malware to come.
Even Microsoft says so, though well hidden on their knowledge-base
< http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/columns/secmgmt/s m0504.mspx>.
So it's time for format c:.
Best way is not to download files from insecure sources. Don't use
insecure programs like the Internet Explorer or Outlook Express. Don't
work as administrator. Shut down services you don't need (no one really
needs any services if not running servers). Keep the system up to date.
Then personal firewalls cannot really block outbound traffic. They say so
but will fail. Only programs which are nice let themselves control via a
personal firewall like Zone Alarm or others. Malware is not nice and
finds its way out.
There are several "proofs of concepts" which proof it. Like
<http://www.dingens.org/breakout-wp.exe>. This is harmless. All it does
is connect to the internet and proofs it. And no firewall on this world
is able to prevent this. Malware uses the same technics.
If you don't trust this you can get the C source (if you can program in
C), have a look and recompile yourself
<http://www.dingens.org/breakout-wp.cpp>.
Conclusion: use your brain, and not those not working "security
software".
But that has not really to do with C64b emulators, so X'post + F'up2
<news:alt.comp.security>.
--
Andreas
Ankman's SID homepage at http://people.freenet.de/ankman/sid.html
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143525 is a reply to message #143521] |
Tue, 26 December 2006 23:58 |
Sam Gillett
Messages: 2422
Registered: June 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Clockmeister" wrote ...
>
> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
> news:J50kh.7119$Rc5.4436@trnddc01...
>>
>> "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>>
>>> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad
>>> thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick
>>> of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based
>>> on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
>>
>> Today's reality? Let's see now. In the last couple of years I have had
>> dozens of viruses sent to me in email, and recently there have been
>> several attempts to install trojans while I have been online.
>
> You need to improve your basic security methods. All I use is hardware
> firewall, AVG, SP2, Stopzilla and the occasional scan with Spyware S&D
> (which very rarely finds anything but a tracker cookie) and I haven't had a
> virus/spyware/worms whatever for years.
I didn't say that I had been infected, just that attempts had been made. All
of the viruses, trojans, and worms were blocked and/or quarantined by the
Norton software I use.
--
Best regards,
Sam Gillett
Change is inevitable,
except from vending machines!
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143526 is a reply to message #143523] |
Wed, 27 December 2006 10:34 |
Clockmeister
Messages: 1444
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Joseph Fenn" <jfenn@lava.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.BSI.4.61.0612261020300.5024@malasada.lava.net...
>
>
> On Tue, 26 Dec 2006, Clockmeister wrote:
>
>>
>> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
>> news:J50kh.7119$Rc5.4436@trnddc01...
>>>
>>> "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>>>
>>>> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a
>>>> bad
>>>> thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally
>>>> sick
>>>> of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all
>>>> based
>>>> on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
>>>
>>> Today's reality? Let's see now. In the last couple of years I have had
>>> dozens of viruses sent to me in email, and recently there have been
>>> several attempts to install trojans while I have been online.
>>
>> You need to improve your basic security methods. All I use is hardware
>> firewall, AVG, SP2, Stopzilla and the occasional scan with Spyware S&D
>> (which very rarely finds anything but a tracker cookie) and I haven't had
>> a
>> virus/spyware/worms whatever for years.
>>
>>> Today's reality is that people still need anti-virus, anti-trojan, and
>>> anti-spyware programs. And they need to update their definitions
>>> frequently (or automatically with some programs).
>>> --
>>
>> And? This isn't a problem and a small price to pay for the convienience
>> of
>> using a well supported, fully featured OS.
>
> And I still say the virus creators are or will be working on VISTA
> soon as it appears. These nuts believe in damaging the most computers
> in the world that they can reach. That one kid in Phillipines
> created one that went right into our USA govt files a few years ago,
> and the Govt is supposed tp have he most solid virus preventor software
> scheme in the world so what can I say.
> Joe
Supposed to, yes, but that doesn't mean that careless people don't leave
gaping holes in the security system.
Sometimes I wonder if the anti-virus software companies themselves don't
create virrii to sell more AV packages.
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143527 is a reply to message #143525] |
Wed, 27 December 2006 10:36 |
Clockmeister
Messages: 1444
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:v3nkh.2720$%M1.1473@trnddc08...
>
> "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>
>> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
>> news:J50kh.7119$Rc5.4436@trnddc01...
>>>
>>> "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>>>
>>>> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a
>>>> bad thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am
>>>> totally sick of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup
>>>> that is all based on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with
>>>> today's reality.
>>>
>>> Today's reality? Let's see now. In the last couple of years I have had
>>> dozens of viruses sent to me in email, and recently there have been
>>> several attempts to install trojans while I have been online.
>>
>> You need to improve your basic security methods. All I use is hardware
>> firewall, AVG, SP2, Stopzilla and the occasional scan with Spyware S&D
>> (which very rarely finds anything but a tracker cookie) and I haven't had
>> a virus/spyware/worms whatever for years.
>
> I didn't say that I had been infected, just that attempts had been made.
> All of the viruses, trojans, and worms were blocked and/or quarantined by
> the Norton software I use.
> --
Well yeah, some do get through and a combination of AVG free, StopZilla and
Spyware S&D makes sure any nasties are dealt with quicksmart.
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143528 is a reply to message #143527] |
Wed, 27 December 2006 10:40 |
user
Messages: 70
Registered: April 2005
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
"Clockmeister" <whowhere@andwhy.com> wrote in message news:12p54ob4au0pk7c@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
> news:v3nkh.2720$%M1.1473@trnddc08...
>>
>> "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>>
>>> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
>>> news:J50kh.7119$Rc5.4436@trnddc01...
>>>>
>>>> "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a
>>>> > bad thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am
>>>> > totally sick of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup
>>>> > that is all based on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with
>>>> > today's reality.
>>>>
>>>> Today's reality? Let's see now. In the last couple of years I have had
>>>> dozens of viruses sent to me in email, and recently there have been
>>>> several attempts to install trojans while I have been online.
>>>
>>> You need to improve your basic security methods. All I use is hardware
>>> firewall, AVG, SP2, Stopzilla and the occasional scan with Spyware S&D
>>> (which very rarely finds anything but a tracker cookie) and I haven't had
>>> a virus/spyware/worms whatever for years.
>>
>> I didn't say that I had been infected, just that attempts had been made.
>> All of the viruses, trojans, and worms were blocked and/or quarantined by
>> the Norton software I use.
>> --
>
> Well yeah, some do get through and a combination of AVG free, StopZilla and
> Spyware S&D makes sure any nasties are dealt with quicksmart.
>
>
>
>
And then some.
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143529 is a reply to message #143522] |
Wed, 27 December 2006 10:48 |
Clockmeister
Messages: 1444
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Joseph Fenn" <jfenn@lava.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.BSI.4.61.0612261007400.5024@malasada.lava.net...
>
> On Tue, 26 Dec 2006, Clockmeister wrote:
>
>>
>> "Payton Byrd" <plbyrd@bellsouth.no.spam.net> wrote in message
>> news:NDzjh.10305$h_1.5828@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> This is just purely irrational dribble. I've been using Windows for
>> many,
>> many years with many, many PCs and I haven't had a Virus since the days
>> of
>> Windows 98. Perhaps if you were to use a modern, secure version of
>> Windows,
>> especially XP SP2, you would not have to be so paranoid. And by the way,
>> there are multiple completely free Virus scanners for Windows that work
>> quite well.
>>
>> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a bad
>> thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am totally sick
>> of
>> is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup that is all based on
>> 10
>> year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do with today's reality.
>>
>>
>> 100% correct.
>
> DONT WORRY. amuthing that is writeable to the mbr can and will be done
> even to the XP and VISTA programs. Just wait and see
> Joe (a C128 user)
>
I'm not worried, securing XP is a trivial matter.
|
|
|
|
| Re: VIRUS and Computer types. [message #143531 is a reply to message #143528] |
Thu, 28 December 2006 08:23 |
Clockmeister
Messages: 1444
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"user" <noemail.com> wrote in message
news:45929502$0$9774$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Clockmeister" <whowhere@andwhy.com> wrote in message
> news:12p54ob4au0pk7c@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
>> news:v3nkh.2720$%M1.1473@trnddc08...
>>>
>>> "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>>>
>>>> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:J50kh.7119$Rc5.4436@trnddc01...
>>>> >
>>>> > "Clockmeister" wrote ...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'm not saying that using the C= 128 to get on the internet is not a
>>>> >> bad thing; it's not! It's actually very commendable. What I am
>>>> >> totally sick of is the constant bashing of Windows in this newsgroup
>>>> >> that is all based on 10 year old bullsh*t that has nothing to do
>>>> >> with
>>>> >> today's reality.
>>>> >
>>>> > Today's reality? Let's see now. In the last couple of years I have
>>>> > had
>>>> > dozens of viruses sent to me in email, and recently there have been
>>>> > several attempts to install trojans while I have been online.
>>>>
>>>> You need to improve your basic security methods. All I use is hardware
>>>> firewall, AVG, SP2, Stopzilla and the occasional scan with Spyware S&D
>>>> (which very rarely finds anything but a tracker cookie) and I haven't
>>>> had
>>>> a virus/spyware/worms whatever for years.
>>>
>>> I didn't say that I had been infected, just that attempts had been
>>> made.
>>> All of the viruses, trojans, and worms were blocked and/or quarantined
>>> by
>>> the Norton software I use.
>>> --
>>
>> Well yeah, some do get through and a combination of AVG free, StopZilla
>> and
>> Spyware S&D makes sure any nasties are dealt with quicksmart.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> And then some.
>
And then some what?
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
