Stop Microsoft
All Things Microsoft => Microsoft Software => Topic started by: Aloone_Jonez on 2 August 2005, 04:07
-
Muzzy was right when he said you don't need anti-virus, recently when I installed Windows I decided to do an experiment and not bother to install an antivirus program.
Upon installing I made the following changes to the default system configuration:
All user acounts are limited.
Disabled ActiveX controls and scripts in Internet Explorer.
Installed Firefox.
Ditched Outlook and used Thunderbird.
Disabled the remote access services.
Disabled Windows update and security alert.
Have I missed anything?
I still use Bittorrent but I don't download any executables.
Today I downloaded AVG anti-virus because Google said it detected malware (probabably just an ad but I panicked anyway) I scanned my PC and not one single virus was found!
I didn't install the memory resident scanner because I knew it would slow the system down be it still loaded some services when my machine booted so I did a regedit and disabled them manualy. Now my system runs as fast as before and I can scan any files right clicking on them clicking scan.
It looks like muzzy was right, you don't need any third party software to run Windows safely if you know what you're doing.
-
This isn't really news...my dad (who doesn't even know what he's doing all the time) hasn't had anti-virus installed for a few months. Nothing has happened.
-
Windows is not as bad as what the people here want it to be.
-
Windows is not as bad as what the people here want it to be.
It really isn't.
I still prefer OSX and Linux over Windows though. Years of using all systems has allowed me to appreciate the elegance of OSX and versatility of a Linux System. Using Windows at work is annoying, even though it does offer some tools that I rather enjoy.
As I type this I am formatting a Windows machine and installing Linux...
-
I don't know... all of my friends' windows machines blow up (not litterally). After a few times they learned how to re-install it themselves, I showed them how to secure it (all the usual stuff), they stopped using kazaa, they stopped using IE.
Many just use it for gaming exclusively, and you know what? it still fucks up. Windows 2000/xp made me feel hope for the windows platform, but that no longer exists. I'll have to see what happens with vista, but I'm not holding my breath
(working in Staples, I'll probably get a legit lisence of windows vista professional when it is released... I *might* test it out... we'll see)
-
I have this firewall gui program installed in Linux called Firestarter, which is basically a front-end for iptables. It logs all the bad things that happen to my computer. Just going through this log is a sobering exercise. I get hundreds of hits per day from Windows worms and trojans. Of course none of them gets in.
Just so you know, there are agents out there that don't like you, and they are banging on your door. Maybe the threat has gone down some in the past few months, but it is most certainly not gone.
-
Even if something gets thought it has quite a low chance of causing any damage because it's quite hard to fuck the system up without administrator rights.
-
Muzzy was right when he said you don't need anti-virus, recently when I installed Windows I decided to do an experiment and not bother to install an antivirus program.
Upon installing I made the following changes to the default system configuration:
All user acounts are limited.
Disabled ActiveX controls and scripts in Internet Explorer.
Installed Firefox.
Ditched Outlook and used Thunderbird.
Disabled the remote access services.
Disabled Windows update and security alert.
Have I missed anything?
I still use Bittorrent but I don't download any executables.
Today I downloaded AVG anti-virus because Google said it detected malware (probabably just an ad but I panicked anyway) I scanned my PC and not one single virus was found!
I didn't install the memory resident scanner because I knew it would slow the system down be it still loaded some services when my machine booted so I did a regedit and disabled them manualy. Now my system runs as fast as before and I can scan any files right clicking on them clicking scan.
It looks like muzzy was right, you don't need any third party software to run Windows safely if you know what you're doing.
Yeah, but this need extra work. And extra work to secure your system is a bitch ;)
But nonetheless, Windows can be quite secure, if the user is not a retard.
I myself do not secure my Windows installation, eg. run everythin as admin. That is because I use Windows ONLY for playing pirated games and such, and so I need some cracking software and virtual drive emulators etc ... and those only run as a root afaik. If I used multi-user setup, I would need to logout/login as admin every time I need to mount another cd/dvd image with GameJack/daemon tools ... and I am kinda lazy so ah ...
-
MS should intergrade a sudo-like program into Vista. That could solve any confusion Windows newbies would have about root/nonroot stuff, the same way ubuntu does (popup a dialog box asking for pass when anything-root needs to be done, like installing software).
-
I was using Windows 2000 SP4 for 8 months without any protection software.
It only fucked up because I deleted Windows Installer one day. :D
-
...I would need to logout/login as admin every time I need to mount another cd/dvd image with GameJack/daemon tools ... and I am kinda lazy so ah ...
Bullshit. I mount cd-images in daemon tools as a power user all the time at work.
-
I have this firewall gui program installed in Linux called Firestarter, which is basically a front-end for iptables. It logs all the bad things that happen to my computer. Just going through this log is a sobering exercise. I get hundreds of hits per day from Windows worms and trojans. Of course none of them gets in.
I get hundreds of hits per day on my BSD router from rooted linux boxes. My ISP filters ports 135,139,445,and 1025 so I don't get hits from owned Windows boxes, but I'm sure they're out there.
-
A sample from my auth.log from today...
Aug 1 16:46:23 router sshd[1336]: Did not receive identification string from 216.127.74.131 Aug 1 17:06:50 router sshd[1354]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41284 ssh2 Aug 1 17:06:51 router sshd[1356]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41343 ssh2 Aug 1 17:06:52 router sshd[1358]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41394 ssh2 Aug 1 17:06:53 router sshd[1360]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41471 ssh2 Aug 1 17:06:54 router sshd[1362]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41533 ssh2 Aug 1 17:06:55 router sshd[1364]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41600 ssh2 Aug 1 17:06:56 router sshd[1366]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41669 ssh2 Aug 1 17:06:57 router sshd[1368]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41734 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:03 router sshd[1370]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41887 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:04 router sshd[1372]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 41950 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:05 router sshd[1374]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42006 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:06 router sshd[1376]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42084 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:07 router sshd[1378]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42155 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:08 router sshd[1380]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42209 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:09 router sshd[1382]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42279 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:10 router sshd[1384]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42345 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:11 router sshd[1386]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42402 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:12 router sshd[1388]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42467 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:13 router sshd[1390]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42543 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:14 router sshd[1392]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42599 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:15 router sshd[1394]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42662 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:16 router sshd[1396]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42737 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:17 router sshd[1398]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42797 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:18 router sshd[1400]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42856 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:19 router sshd[1402]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42930 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:20 router sshd[1404]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 42992 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:21 router sshd[1406]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 43052 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:22 router sshd[1408]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 43122 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:23 router sshd[1410]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 43186 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:24 router sshd[1412]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 43245 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:25 router sshd[1414]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 43305 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:26 router sshd[1416]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 43376 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:27 router sshd[1418]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 43430 ssh2 Aug 1 17:07:28 router sshd[1420]: Failed password for root from 216.127.74.131 port 43492 ssh2
That Ip hosts, http://www.solocamping.com which is a linux/apache 1.3 box (http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.solocamping.com).
I see this crap every single day in my logs. Of course they are pissing into the wind, since root logins are not even allowed over ssh on my router, but still the amount of owned linux boxes in the wild is enourmous.
-
the amount of owned linux boxes in the wild is enourmous.
How do you know the "attacks" are coming from owned GNU/Linux boxes? Couldn't the cracker just be using their own box or some other box they have legit access to? Or even some other operating system?
-
To get back on topic, my windows partition doesn't run active AV either. I do have Avast installed, but I don't have the resident protection enabled. I only use my windows for games, so the need for resident protection is jsut not there. I do however save all of the email viruses I get to my FAT partition and collect them in my Avast virus chest when I boot into Windows.
-
How do you know the "attacks" are coming from owned GNU/Linux boxes? Couldn't the cracker just be using their own box or some other box they have legit access to?
That's possible, but unlikely. The pattern in the log file is the classic one of an owned box randomly tryinging weak root passwords on random addresses. I see this exact pattern of login attempts daily basis - from linux machines all over the planet. They either try to log in as root around 20-50 times with common passwords, or they try a slightly different tactic -they will try to find password-less/test accounts by trying many common usernames like test, operator,email,joe,paul,chris,daniel, etc.
-
Bullshit. I mount cd-images in daemon tools as a power user all the time at work.
Afaik running as a Power User is almost as insecure as running as admin.
Or am I totally lost?
-
Afaik running as a Power User is almost as insecure as running as admin.
Or am I totally lost?
There is little difference between local administrator and power user in Windows NT/2000/XP.
-
There is little difference between local administrator and power user in Windows NT/2000/XP.
Thanks for the info :)
I am just lazy, so I go with adming rights ... and it won't matter if my Windows goes boom, since I can easily reinstall it. It resides in another HD than my Linux installation.
-
There is little difference between local administrator and power user in Windows NT/2000/XP.
I wouldn't say that.
Power Users cannot install/remove device drivers
Power user cannot install activeX controlls
Power users cannot take ownership of system files
Power users cannot change networking settings
Power users cannot change (or even READ) security policies/IPSEC policies
Power users cannot read the security log, and cannot clear any of the logs
Power users cannot change the firewall settings
All of these things make rootkits virtually impossible to install as a power user. It also keeps "drive by downloads" in IE from working, and many other nasty things from happening if the user executes some bad code.
Yes, you can write to many directories and some parts of the registry that regular users can't, but to say there is little difference from a power user and an administrator is wrong.
-
My ISP filters ports 135,139,445,and 1025 so I don't get hits from owned Windows boxes, but I'm sure they're out there.
My ISP, a huge strongly firewalled university network, gets no outside hits unless specifically authorized. But inside, anything goes. I get hits on 445 every couple minutes. Activity on the other ports has not been as strong. And all the hits are from different IP addresses - meaning that there is a sick amount of computers on campus that have viruses. Antivirus is required to protect you from the stupid, as well as the crafty. And let's face it, most Windows users are retarded.
-
Yeah, I know what you mean. I work at a school. Back when msblaster was out, I set up a sniffer to listen for port 445 knocks and then blocked their mac addresses in our core routers. Tons of students were infected and blasting the network with packets. We posted a sign in the doorms telling them to clean up their computers and then come by the IT office to have their access restored.
-
I wouldn't say that.
Damn that Dutch Windows 2000 :rolleyes:
So Power User = Beperkte mogelijkheden
In which case, you're right.
-
"Beperkte mogelijkheden" == "Restricted possibilities"
hehe :D
-
"Beperkte mogelijkheden" == "Restricted possibilities"
hehe :D
Okay, now I'm really confused, even more confused than learning Active Directory (which gave me headaches from the chaos and the mess).
-
I ran window for 3 months without anti-virus, i didnt get any viruses but the amount of spyware was incredible
-
Did you have anti virus installed?
Did only access the Internet from a limited user account?
Have you installed any shareware?
-
at that time i didnt have anti-virus and it was not a limeited acount with no sharware installed.When i finally got anti-virus it found no viruses but ad-aware found lots of spyware regularly, Even with Firefox. I get maby 3 or 4 different spyware every 2 months now so.........
-
Yes that's because you used an administrator account which leaves your system wide open to infection - you're very lucky you wern't infected with a really nasty virus.
-
ya, i was looking for an anti-virus at the time because i hated to keep paying for norton/McAffe
-
Or you could just use a free antivirus and only access the Internet with a limited user account. I recomend using a scanner that doesn't have to be memory resident so it won't slow your system down too much.
-
i have a free anti-virus right now with a scanner but, i have an athlon 64 3000 so i dont really notice a difference in perofrmence while gaming if it is on or not.
I just gotta find a 64bit linux distro, I tried mandrake and, i thought it was garbage
-
Okay, now I'm really confused, even more confused than learning Active Directory (which gave me headaches from the chaos and the mess).
Active Directory is pretty darn logical to me. If you have any questions about AD, feel free to ask. I know a lot about it.
-
i have a free anti-virus right now with a scanner but, i have an athlon 64 3000 so i dont really notice a difference in perofrmence while gaming if it is on or not.
I just gotta find a 64bit linux distro, I tried mandrake and, i thought it was garbage
Mandrake sucks, try debian :thumbup:
-
debian does not work with net install on my MOBO, guess i have to go for 14CD install
-
Windows is not as bad as what the people here want it to be.
then you should use it.
-
I do.
Pillock.
-
My WinXP Sp2 never has spyware/viruses but our family Win2000 SP4 is constantly getting suspicious files in the System32 folder. Its stopped now that I've made them use Firefox instead of IE. Funny that...
But you only get these programs if
A. you are stupid enough to download them (Kazaa), or
B. use unsafe programs (IE)
I doubt anyone in these forums fall under these catagories
-
If you're forced to use IE (like at work or for pages that won't show in Firefox) you can make it nearly as secure as Firefox by disabling ActiveX scripting and controls.
-
If pages won't show in Firefox, they are wrong. Think about browsers as spell-checkers. Firefox goes through and checks the spelling of every word, and then either passes the document or fails the document. IE goes through and checks every word, and then if some are misspelled, it says "eh, no big deal" and passes the document. That's a pretty lame metaphor, but any code that IE will interpret and Firefox will not is madeup bullshit code, and the developers should be punished.
-
i agree,
I did the test somewhere cant remember where though that had a picture that was made with new code that most browsers didnt support, IE displayed pixels all over the place and firefox almost had the complete picture
-
If pages won't show in Firefox, they are wrong. Think about browsers as spell-checkers. Firefox goes through and checks the spelling of every word, and then either passes the document or fails the document. IE goes through and checks every word, and then if some are misspelled, it says "eh, no big deal" and passes the document. That's a pretty lame metaphor, but any code that IE will interpret and Firefox will not is madeup bullshit code, and the developers should be punished.
I already knew this, but how does this help me? if I'm looking for the best deal for my car insurance I'm not going to refuse the cheapest firm because their website doesn't support Firefox. :rolleyes:
-
I already knew this, but how does this help me? if I'm looking for the best deal for my car insurance I'm not going to refuse the cheapest firm because their website doesn't support Firefox. :rolleyes:
Are there many websites out there that don't work in Firefox?
I've never had a problem with it. The worst website I use often is o2.ie, but it's still more than usable.
-
i have seen some sites that work right in firefox but dont work right in IE, No seriously
-
Are there many websites out there that don't work in Firefox?
I've never had a problem with it. The worst website I use often is o2.ie, but it's still more than usable.
I didn't have a problem until I started looking for car insurance.
i have seen some sites that work right in firefox but dont work right in IE, No seriously
I have as well.
-
Ha! Vista :] that f*cked up son of a bi*ch .
It eats sys resources lika an aligator .
Just the next ms lame os
---
so just you know xp is the same .
and... yes i am using msie and it is lame but hey it is
ultra edited with the new "enough is enough"
lock down util . you should try it -.>use google
-
Anyone here know what the actual minimum system requirements of Windows Vista will be?
-
I'm sick of nasty viruses.
I wish I could cut the priveleges my penis has over my body with some form of policy to prevent future spread.
-
Anyone here know what the actual minimum system requirements of Windows Vista will be?
One BILLION dollars! *Dr. Evil face*
or
Precisely one... human soul.
-
No complete details of Vista's hardware requirements have yet been revealed by Microsoft beyond general recommendations and guidelines.
The guidelines for Beta 1 give this basic guide [3]:
* 512 megabytes or more of RAM
* a dedicated graphics card with DirectX 9.0 support
* a modern Intel Pentium- or AMD Athlon-based PC
-
* a dedicated graphics card with DirectX 9.0 support
Dell won't be happy with this :)