Do i need to install an antivirus software if....

Testy

Your perseverance is creditable, your choice of OS in a home environment
less so.. all OS'es have a place somewhere.. no single OS could replace
all..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm





"Testy" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 06:36:05 -0600, Bruce Chambers wrote:


I don't mean to sound harsh, but given today's widely-publicized
and well-known hostile Internet environment, only a fool or a masochist
would go on-line without both a firewall and antivirus protection.

Such basic precautions are the computing equivalents of wearing
seatbelts while driving or riding in an automobile - they're there to
prevent/reduce the damage if an accident should occur.


UNLESS one is smart enough to use Linux!

Testy

....

Name one.
I have an anti-virus program. It never finds anything.

You're kidding, right? There were several of them at one time, using
various implementations to trigger themselves. As far as I'm concerned, in
"theory", MS plugged the holes used for that because the issue did go away,
but ... that doesn't mean there is not something in the future being readied
to exploit it ina different way.

All in all, I'd say a previous poster was right when they asked if it would
be OK to possibly have to do a rebuild of a malware got a good hold on your
system. If it's NBD, no av needed. That's a little like using the rythm
method; things go wrong g at the last minute.
Actually, I don't think that's the main issue; if you connect to the net,
you should be using av/spyware/firewall protection.
BTW, I do recall your previous opinions on this subject over the months;
It's a free world, so there's nothign wrong with what YOU do, but it is
wrong to try to make your opinion everyone's opinion.

Regards,

Pop

....

I don't mean to sound harsh, but given today's widely-publicized and
well-known hostile Internet environment, only a fool or a masochist would
go on-line without both a firewall and antivirus protection.

Such basic precautions are the computing equivalents of wearing seatbelts
while driving or riding in an automobile - they're there to prevent/reduce
the damage if an accident should occur.
....

I don't mean to sound harsh either Bruce, but I take exception to the strong
words in your quote. Neither I nor anyone else I know thinks of me as a
fool or a mashchist. I do however purposely run, as do many others, one of
my machines totally WITHOUT a firewall, antivirus or the several spyware
detectors. Other times it'll run with one of those, or maybe two of them,
but never all three. One can LEARN a LOT about this "hostile environment"
that way.
There's nothing wrong with ANYONE having the opinion they don't need
that, and there are several circumstances where it's a valid philosophy.
And of course, there are even many MORE reasons why one should run all
three, but ... you painted the world at large with one badly-colored brush
and on top of that used offensive and denigrating language as it will be
interpreted by many.
The hostility of the web is in the eye of the beholder; you have no
business speaking that way to a newbie, and I respectfully submit that you
DID mean to sound harsh; you think it's a way to emphasize, but it isn't.
Now, had you chosen the CORRECT track, you would have been more
educational and less fanatical in the nature of your writing.

Regards,

Pop

PS - I don't intend to debate this, so don't feel obligated to respond to
me. I'll probably read it, but there is little you can say that could
change my opinion of the post.

Geez, Ken, do you treat all apparent newbies that way? I've driven in THREE
countries where there was no need for auto insurance. All I carried was
theft in two of them, and nothing in the third.
What's wrong with being educational? Or just don't bother if you can't
be useful.

Pop

--
Let someone else do it
I'm retired!
"Ken Blake" wrote in message
...
In ,
Õý°æÓû§ ·´À¬»ø typed:

i had an antivirus software installed in another pc for a year. for
the whole year, i only got an e-mail that attached a virus infected
file ONCE. the antivirus software warned me about it. however, it
really doesn't matter whether i received a warning or not, i never
open any attchment in e-mails.
so in the past year, the antiviurs software seems a bit useless and
it took up the computer resource a bit.


That sounds to me like saying how unhappy you are that you have life
insurance and haven't died.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup

Even Lindows, aka, Linspire, comes with an anti virus program and firewall.
5.0 looks nice.

Alias

"Leythos" wrote

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:17:50 -0400, Testy wrote:

UNLESS one is smart enough to use Linux!

Now that was lame (and before you get upset, check my headers, I'm posting
from a Linux box). Linux is vulnerable to Viruses and Exploits, it's just
not targeted, AT THIS TIME, because it's so easy to target other OS's.

--

remove 999 in order to email me

Pop wrote:
Geez, Ken, do you treat all apparent newbies that way? I've driven
in THREE countries where there was no need for auto insurance.

No need by whom?
It's precisely that sort of country where you would be wise to have
insurance.
Just as it is wise to protect yourself against the possibility of attack.
Lighten up, Pop!
:O)
Gilbert

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 15:23:00 +0800, "Õý°æÓû§" ·´À¬»ø
wrote:

I seldom download anything from the internet
never open any attachment in e-mails
always update windows from windowsupdate
running xp sp2
You don't have to download anything from the web. The majority of malicious web
pages don't care if you want it or not. And in most cases won't even ask your
permission to stick it on your machine.

Do you know when you're being lied to ?

You could best answer that question if you can ask the same question this time
next year with the same clean machine.

ie: My virus software updated the pattern file yesterday.
It found 1 that I've had on my machine for years.
It also found one in a restore point.
Both items that make them older than a week.
The one in the restore point is so new that it has zero information about it.

I get alerts just by getting email even without opening it. I switched to agent
specifically because OE automatically launched every virus.
A text email reader can't automatically launch anything destructive [yet].

If your times worth less than $40.00 an hour, I'd say go without the virus
software. You can get a reliable virus scanner for that much a year.

i had an antivirus software installed in another pc for a year. for the
whole year, i only got an e-mail that attached a virus infected file ONCE.
the antivirus software warned me about it. however, it really doesn't matter
whether i received a warning or not, i never open any attchment in e-mails.

so in the past year, the antiviurs software seems a bit useless and it took
up the computer resource a bit.

now i got a laptop, thinking of not installing any antivirus to keep it fast
and less resource consumed.


--
more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html

Pop

Any computer hooked into either a local or wide area network that is used as
a 'honeypot' such that the user can learn is a menace to any other computer
to which it connects, especially in the hands of a newbie.. it could be
mine, or the computer of another complete newbie, or an older person with no
technical skills who relies on it to stay in touch with family..

If everybody took security as seriously as they should, and that includes
those who feel that they are 100% smart enough at all times, maybe we would
not have so many security issues..

Your 'PS' suggests to me that you don't care who is affected.. that you will
do whatever you want anyway.. thanks for that.. we can all sleep safer
tonight knowing that, I'm sure..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm





"Pop" wrote in message
...
...

I don't mean to sound harsh, but given today's widely-publicized and
well-known hostile Internet environment, only a fool or a masochist would
go on-line without both a firewall and antivirus protection.

Such basic precautions are the computing equivalents of wearing seatbelts
while driving or riding in an automobile - they're there to
prevent/reduce the damage if an accident should occur.
...

I don't mean to sound harsh either Bruce, but I take exception to the
strong words in your quote. Neither I nor anyone else I know thinks of me
as a fool or a mashchist. I do however purposely run, as do many others,
one of my machines totally WITHOUT a firewall, antivirus or the several
spyware detectors. Other times it'll run with one of those, or maybe two
of them, but never all three. One can LEARN a LOT about this "hostile
environment" that way.
There's nothing wrong with ANYONE having the opinion they don't need
that, and there are several circumstances where it's a valid philosophy.
And of course, there are even many MORE reasons why one should run all
three, but ... you painted the world at large with one badly-colored brush
and on top of that used offensive and denigrating language as it will be
interpreted by many.
The hostility of the web is in the eye of the beholder; you have no
business speaking that way to a newbie, and I respectfully submit that
you DID mean to sound harsh; you think it's a way to emphasize, but it
isn't.
Now, had you chosen the CORRECT track, you would have been more
educational and less fanatical in the nature of your writing.

Regards,

Pop

PS - I don't intend to debate this, so don't feel obligated to respond to
me. I'll probably read it, but there is little you can say that could
change my opinion of the post.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 18:04:15 +0000, Leythos wrote:

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:17:50 -0400, Testy wrote:

UNLESS one is smart enough to use Linux!

Now that was lame (and before you get upset, check my headers, I'm posting
from a Linux box). Linux is vulnerable to Viruses and Exploits, it's just
not targeted, AT THIS TIME, because it's so easy to target other OS's.


Sure EVERYTHING is vulnerable just some are MORE vulnerable than others.
There are many excellent reasons to use Linux LESS vulnerability is only
ONE of them.

So NO not lame at all.

Testy

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:01:19 -0600, Bruce Chambers wrote:



UNLESS one is smart enough to use Linux!



Utter and complete nonsense.

http://www.viruslibrary.com/virusinfo/Linux.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1123827.stm

http://www.claymania.com/unix-viruses.html

http://www.vnunet.com/news/1127347

http://antivirus.about.com/od/unixthreats/

And thats just the first few results of a Google search that came up
with at least 20 pages of links.

Spoken truly like a man with absolutely no personal experience. Of course
every OS is vulnerable to attacks MS more so partly due to its
"popularity" bur MOSTLY due to poor design and huge gaping holes that have
existed for years.

Testy

"Linux LESS vulnerability" ?

http://search.cert.org/query.html?co...set=iso-8859-1
Document count 83

http://search.cert.org/query.html?co...set=iso-8859-1
Document count 65




"Testy" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 18:04:15 +0000, Leythos wrote:

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:17:50 -0400, Testy wrote:

UNLESS one is smart enough to use Linux!

Now that was lame (and before you get upset, check my headers, I'm
posting
from a Linux box). Linux is vulnerable to Viruses and Exploits, it's just
not targeted, AT THIS TIME, because it's so easy to target other OS's.


Sure EVERYTHING is vulnerable just some are MORE vulnerable than others.
There are many excellent reasons to use Linux LESS vulnerability is only
ONE of them.

So NO not lame at all.

Testy

"Gerry Cornell" wrote in message

Frank

Do any of your many grandchildren ever get within 6 feet of your
computer?

Heck, no. They don't even get in the same room as my computers.

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/OE
Please respond in Newsgroup only. Do not send email
http://www.fjsmjs.com
Protect your PC
http://www.microsoft.com./athome/sec...t/default.aspx
http://defendingyourmachine.blogspot.com/

Hmm, too bad. You're still painting the world with one pastel color, aren't
you? I'd expect better from you. If you're that frightened of my machine,
then I guess you should get off the net, eh? I guarantee you my machine
could not harm yours or anyone else's. Just because a person is wise enough
to ask questions does not indicate anything more than a niche they need
better information on.
You're a very poor judge.
OK, I'm gone: you're not worth disturbing the ether for any further than
this.
Hope your mind opens someday;
Pop
--
Let someone else do it
I'm retired!
"Mike Hall (MS-MVP)" wrote in message
...
Pop

Any computer hooked into either a local or wide area network that is used
as a 'honeypot' such that the user can learn is a menace to any other
computer to which it connects, especially in the hands of a newbie.. it
could be mine, or the computer of another complete newbie, or an older
person with no technical skills who relies on it to stay in touch with
family..

If everybody took security as seriously as they should, and that includes
those who feel that they are 100% smart enough at all times, maybe we
would not have so many security issues..

Your 'PS' suggests to me that you don't care who is affected.. that you
will do whatever you want anyway.. thanks for that.. we can all sleep
safer tonight knowing that, I'm sure..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm





"Pop" wrote in message
...
...

I don't mean to sound harsh, but given today's widely-publicized and
well-known hostile Internet environment, only a fool or a masochist
would go on-line without both a firewall and antivirus protection.

Such basic precautions are the computing equivalents of wearing
seatbelts while driving or riding in an automobile - they're there to
prevent/reduce the damage if an accident should occur.
...

I don't mean to sound harsh either Bruce, but I take exception to the
strong words in your quote. Neither I nor anyone else I know thinks of
me as a fool or a mashchist. I do however purposely run, as do many
others, one of my machines totally WITHOUT a firewall, antivirus or the
several spyware detectors. Other times it'll run with one of those, or
maybe two of them, but never all three. One can LEARN a LOT about this
"hostile environment" that way.
There's nothing wrong with ANYONE having the opinion they don't need
that, and there are several circumstances where it's a valid philosophy.
And of course, there are even many MORE reasons why one should run all
three, but ... you painted the world at large with one badly-colored
brush and on top of that used offensive and denigrating language as it
will be interpreted by many.
The hostility of the web is in the eye of the beholder; you have no
business speaking that way to a newbie, and I respectfully submit that
you DID mean to sound harsh; you think it's a way to emphasize, but it
isn't.
Now, had you chosen the CORRECT track, you would have been more
educational and less fanatical in the nature of your writing.

Regards,

Pop

PS - I don't intend to debate this, so don't feel obligated to respond to
me. I'll probably read it, but there is little you can say that could
change my opinion of the post.

"Gilbert" wrote in message
...
Pop wrote:
Geez, Ken, do you treat all apparent newbies that way? I've driven
in THREE countries where there was no need for auto insurance.

No need by whom?
It's precisely that sort of country where you would be wise to have
insurance.
Just as it is wise to protect yourself against the possibility of attack.
Lighten up, Pop!
:O)
Gilbert

g, something you need to understand about me; I respond to others in the
same vein/manner they use. If you seem like an idiot, I'm going to treat
you that way. If you seem like a well rounded, interpersonal skills biased
individual, I'm going to treat you that way. If you deserve respect, I'm
going to give you respect.
You see, it's you who invited that post by attacking a newbie for no good
reason. If you had a good reason, you would have indicated same by now;
you're that kind of person. Had you not treated a newbie unreasonably I
never would have thought a thing about you. But I abhor people who are so
inconsiderate as to whelp-up on a pup like that for no good reason; so I
occasionally whelp-up on them myself. I don't get mad, I'm not worried
about revenge or getting even, I just respond in-kind. Call it education.
No thinking person would behave as you have done.
I'm not going to debate it; you're becoming boring quickly. I'm sure
you'll appreciate that.

Pop

"Testy" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:01:19 -0600, Bruce Chambers wrote:



UNLESS one is smart enough to use Linux!



Utter and complete nonsense.

http://www.viruslibrary.com/virusinfo/Linux.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1123827.stm

http://www.claymania.com/unix-viruses.html

http://www.vnunet.com/news/1127347

http://antivirus.about.com/od/unixthreats/

And thats just the first few results of a Google search that came up
with at least 20 pages of links.

Spoken truly like a man with absolutely no personal experience. Of course
every OS is vulnerable to attacks MS more so partly due to its
"popularity" bur MOSTLY due to poor design and huge gaping holes that have
existed for years.

Testy



Ahhh, the comforts of fanaticism.