If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Antivirus during fresh install of Windows7
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 17:53:11 -0400, Paul
wrote: "Windows 7 USB DVD Download Tool (extracts from ISO9660 file and copies files to USB stick)" The first link is the README, the second link the download. http://web.archive.org/web/201201022...usbdvd_dwnTool http://web.archive.org/web/201110052...B-DVD-tool.exe If you operate that tool from a 64-bit OS, it can make 32 bit or 64 bit USB sticks from 32 bit ISO or 64 bit ISO files. Super Paul! Thanks a lot. Both the old and the new install are/will be 64 bit -- Jesper Kaas - |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Antivirus during fresh install of Windows7
Paul, I am connected to internet via a fibre-modem with a built in
router. Delivered by my ISP. I have only done changes to the wi-fi part of it, and can't say if it's got a firewall. But an indication that is has some protection is that I for tears have run virtual XP-machines in Oracle Virtualbox without any problems. They are all connected to internet, and I have not bothered to install antivirus software on all. Most of what you write below is way over my head, but it gives me some hints. But as Good Guy writes: I am too stupid to run a Windows system. Hope I won't get killed for top-posting, but think it is appropriate here. Besty regards On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 17:48:02 -0400, Paul wrote: Directly connected to a dialup modem or a broadband modem ? Or connected to a modem/router, with the router NAT cone to protect you ? If you used a router, a lot of trivial stuff can be stopped. SASSER would be stopped. SMB attacks would be stopped (because I don't think a router by default opens the Windows file sharing port - that would be a terrible feature!!!). My first router had IDENTD not stealthed, but that could be fixed with a port forwarding rule. I read somewhere it was a bad idea to leave it visible, but I've not read of a means of exploiting it. You should: 1) Be using IPV4 (because of coincidental NAT with IPV4 on ruter). 2) Be using a router, between the Internet and your computer (for the NAT, the network address translation). By matching outgoing ports to incoming ports, plus stateful packet inspection, it's possible to do a decent job of "hardening" your Internet side. It's not clear to me, other than security-by-obscurity (the 4 billion local addresses), how IPV6 can be made to afford the same level of coincidental protection. I know there are some idiots out there, running Windows connected directly to just the modem portion, then relying on the Windows Firewall to protect them, but that's like this... "The Windows Firewall... Wile E Coyote" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:T...screencap).jpg All you need is for one clever Black Hat to find an exploit for the Windows Firewall, and then you're cooked. While looking up SASSER yesterday, I see there are more worm exploits out there than I was expecting. SASSER alone wouldn't be an issue unless you were installing one of the older OSes. But some of the others might actually need to be patched, to make the machine safe. In which case, a person could prepare a "patch kit" with WSUSOffline and inject ~150 security updates via a USB stick. I've done that before. It takes a while, no matter how you do it. HTH, Paul -- Jesper Kaas - |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Antivirus during fresh install of Windows7
In message , Ken Blake
writes: On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 11:45:24 -0500, Sam E wrote: Some people believe that installing antivirus software weakens the OS, providing more flaws viruses can use to infect it. Yes, probably some people believe that. Some people believe the earth is flat. Some people believe all sorts of false things. "Installing antivirus software weakens the OS" is one of the many false things that some people believe. Totally agree with you there. Also, a lot of problems come from AV interfering with things. Another false thing. Not 100% in agreement with you there - well, I suppose it depends on the interpretation of "a lot". Certainly, AV software _does_ interfere with things, although modern software (both the AV and the other applications) have improved a lot in recent years, such that you're less likely to encounter such problems than you were a few years ago. (A lot of the reason being changes in the OSs themselves, which now don't allow software to do things older ones did, so it's more that modern OSs do the "interfering" than the AV stuff doing it.) However if you run two or more anti-virus programs, yes, they can interfere with each other. You'd think that, in that if nothing else they'd see each others' signature tables and ring bells; and I've certainly seen reports of people who have experienced problems (mainly huge slowdown rather than false reporting); however, I _think_ I've also seen people who say they are running two or more without problems. But I should point out that not all anti-virus programs are equally good. Undoubtedly some of the poorer ones *can* cause problems. Yes, they vary. (And the "best" aren't always the most popular, or most advertised.) Some people also believe that if you practice "safe hex," an anti-virus program isn't necessary. That *is* correct. However (and it's a *big* however) unless you *never* go to the Internet and *never* insert CDs, DVDs, external hard drives, thumb drives, etc., you can never be completely sure you are always practicing safe hex. Rather than hoping you are always practicing safe hex it's wise to not only do what you think is safe hex, but also run an anti-virus program. As far as I'm concerned, not running an anti-virus program is the height of foolishness. It's better to be safe than sorry. Yes, I'm fairly careful, but have had the odd popup from an AV. (Usually just when downloading, unpacking, or similar, before actually running anything.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Does my Bradshaw look big in this? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Antivirus during fresh install of Windows7
On Sun, 28 Oct 2018 10:56:52 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote: In message , Ken Blake writes: On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 11:45:24 -0500, Sam E wrote: Some people believe that installing antivirus software weakens the OS, providing more flaws viruses can use to infect it. Yes, probably some people believe that. Some people believe the earth is flat. Some people believe all sorts of false things. "Installing antivirus software weakens the OS" is one of the many false things that some people believe. Totally agree with you there. Also, a lot of problems come from AV interfering with things. Another false thing. Not 100% in agreement with you there - well, I suppose it depends on the interpretation of "a lot". Certainly, AV software _does_ interfere with things, although modern software (both the AV and the other applications) have improved a lot in recent years, such that you're less likely to encounter such problems than you were a few years ago. (A lot of the reason being changes in the OSs themselves, which now don't allow software to do things older ones did, so it's more that modern OSs do the "interfering" than the AV stuff doing it.) However if you run two or more anti-virus programs, yes, they can interfere with each other. You'd think that, in that if nothing else they'd see each others' signature tables and ring bells; and I've certainly seen reports of people who have experienced problems (mainly huge slowdown rather than false reporting); however, I _think_ I've also seen people who say they are running two or more without problems. People say all sorts of things. That doesn't make them true. But I should point out that not all anti-virus programs are equally good. Undoubtedly some of the poorer ones *can* cause problems. Yes, they vary. (And the "best" aren't always the most popular, or most advertised.) As far as I'm concerned, the two most popular and most advertised, Norton and McAfee, are also among the poorest. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|