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
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 17:51:16 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
Roger Blake wrote on 2016/01/03: Live wrote: Viruses are now officially to be considered dead – until further notice. The typical non-technical user has no knowledge of the distinctions between different types of malware and refers to any unwanted crap that manages to get into their PC as a "virus" - even if they themselves installed it. My experience with ransomware and zombieware (installed by others that I have to cleanup) is that the user was lured into installing it. They hit a site that tells them they are infected. The boobs believe it and install the malware. The major security vulnerability of a general- purpose OS is the user. Because computers are sold to everyone, gullibles are included (and the same reason why spam continues). Logically speaking, the blame for the spread of malware can be aimed, fairly and squarely, at MSFT's door. :-) As a matter of fact, there's even proof of this culpability in the default fileview options of "Hide known file type extensions" (eg exe, com, scr, dll, and so on) that have been present since at least windows95 (if not earlier) - a gift to the trojan writers if ever anything from MSFT could be called such a gift. The problem of malware exploded when the idiot consumers gained ready access to internet services via their "designed for idiots" windows encumbered PCs in the late 90s. When you redesign your product so that *even* an idiot can use it then compound it by dumbing it down so that *only* an idiot would *want* to use it, you land up with billions of 'Marks' just waiting to be conned by one internet scammer or another. Up until the advent of win98 and winME and winXP, MFST's main target market demographic had been the corporate and SME, user group (blessed with at least some training) and home user enthusiasts with at least *some* clue as to what a computer OS was all about (storage and manipulation of data - the 'D' in DOS standing in for the data storage part of the acronym). This focus shifted in the late 90s to the more lucrative market demographic of "feckin' clueless consumers", lucrative because they numbered in the billions rather than mere millions and, better still, could have the wool pulled over their eyes with consummate ease. Never mind that gullibles are included in the 'marketing to everyone' paradigm, gullibles pretty well defines MSFT's target market which they have pursued so relentlessly as to completely **** off their former market demographic simply because we're now such an insignificant fraction of a percent of the total market that they simply don't give a toss any more. -- Johnny B Good |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
On 1/5/16 5:07 PM, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 17:51:16 -0600, VanguardLH wrote: Roger Blake wrote on 2016/01/03: Live wrote: Viruses are now officially to be considered dead – until further notice. The typical non-technical user has no knowledge of the distinctions between different types of malware and refers to any unwanted crap that manages to get into their PC as a "virus" - even if they themselves installed it. My experience with ransomware and zombieware (installed by others that I have to cleanup) is that the user was lured into installing it. They hit a site that tells them they are infected. The boobs believe it and install the malware. The major security vulnerability of a general- purpose OS is the user. Because computers are sold to everyone, gullibles are included (and the same reason why spam continues). Logically speaking, the blame for the spread of malware can be aimed, fairly and squarely, at MSFT's door. :-) As a matter of fact, there's even proof of this culpability in the default fileview options of "Hide known file type extensions" (eg exe, com, scr, dll, and so on) that have been present since at least windows95 (if not earlier) - a gift to the trojan writers if ever anything from MSFT could be called such a gift. The problem of malware exploded when the idiot consumers gained ready access to internet services via their "designed for idiots" windows encumbered PCs in the late 90s. When you redesign your product so that *even* an idiot can use it then compound it by dumbing it down so that *only* an idiot would *want* to use it, you land up with billions of 'Marks' just waiting to be conned by one internet scammer or another. Up until the advent of win98 and winME and winXP, MFST's main target market demographic had been the corporate and SME, user group (blessed with at least some training) and home user enthusiasts with at least *some* clue as to what a computer OS was all about (storage and manipulation of data - the 'D' in DOS standing in for the data storage part of the acronym). Except that the "D" in DOS is for Disk, not data. :-) This focus shifted in the late 90s to the more lucrative market demographic of "feckin' clueless consumers", lucrative because they numbered in the billions rather than mere millions and, better still, could have the wool pulled over their eyes with consummate ease. Never mind that gullibles are included in the 'marketing to everyone' paradigm, gullibles pretty well defines MSFT's target market which they have pursued so relentlessly as to completely **** off their former market demographic simply because we're now such an insignificant fraction of a percent of the total market that they simply don't give a toss any more. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.5 Firefox 42.0 Thunderbird 38.0.1 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
Ken Springer wrote:
As a matter of fact, there's even proof of this culpability in the default fileview options of "Hide known file type extensions" I find it a bit funny, how Microsoft will not fix certain things, in their development process. Some brain dead features just seem to migrate from OS to OS. Presumably they have a reason for doing that, but I cannot fathom what that reason might be. Say for example, I have dog****.txt dog****.exe and I'm in a freshly installed OS. I see dog**** --- funny indecipherable icon dog**** --- slightly different funny indecipherable icon and somehow I'm supposed to use my 20-20 vision to tell that one is a text file, the other is an EXE, and I shouldn't double-click the EXE by accident. It makes it hard to quickly glance at a folder, and "hit" the right one on demand. They could still have their funny icons, plus have the extensions exposed. But release after release, it's still the same way by default. Boggles the mind. It would be really really interesting, to have their GUI design guru, explain how this is a good thing. Shurely the other staff have complained by now. It's like the various "sort order" features in File Explorer, the inability to have File Open dialogs preserve a user's preferred representation and so on. Designs preserved in scrupulous detail since the dawn of time. Never any "accidental improvements". They must have this really old employee, past retirement age, who reviews each OS.. and makes sure File Explorer is busted in exactly the same way :-) Paul |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
Paul posted this via :
Ken Springer wrote: As a matter of fact, there's even proof of this culpability in the default fileview options of "Hide known file type extensions" I find it a bit funny, how Microsoft will not fix certain things, in their development process. Some brain dead features just seem to migrate from OS to OS. Presumably they have a reason for doing that, but I cannot fathom what that reason might be. Say for example, I have dog****.txt dog****.exe and I'm in a freshly installed OS. I see dog**** --- funny indecipherable icon dog**** --- slightly different funny indecipherable icon and somehow I'm supposed to use my 20-20 vision to tell that one is a text file, the other is an EXE, and I shouldn't double-click the EXE by accident. It makes it hard to quickly glance at a folder, and "hit" the right one on demand. They could still have their funny icons, plus have the extensions exposed. But release after release, it's still the same way by default. Boggles the mind. It would be really really interesting, to have their GUI design guru, explain how this is a good thing. Shurely the other staff have complained by now. It's like the various "sort order" features in File Explorer, the inability to have File Open dialogs preserve a user's preferred representation and so on. Designs preserved in scrupulous detail since the dawn of time. Never any "accidental improvements". They must have this really old employee, past retirement age, who reviews each OS.. and makes sure File Explorer is busted in exactly the same way :-) Paul One way to resolve your stated example (puppiepoopoo.txt vs. puppiepoopoo.exe) is to navigate to "Folder Options" dialog and make a simple adjustment on the "View" tab. Use File Explorer, click "View", click on "Options" then click on the little drop-down icon. On the resultant "Folder Options" dialog, click on the "View" tab. In the "Advanced settings:" frame, literally on the first screen, you can check/uncheck (select/de-select) the following options: "Display the full path in the title bar"; "Show hidden files, folders, and drives"; and, specifically, UN-check "Hide extensions for known file types". I leave "Hide protected operating system files (Recommended)" checked; but I regularly uncheck it to do some maintenance or investigation tasks, then recheck it when I'm done... Likely the reason they do it the way they do it is because if they didn't do it the way they do it, a whole lot of new users would inadvertantly be deleting essential system files or accidently cut-and-paste them to Lord only knows where, etc., etc., etc... But, it's easy enough to adjust. Admittedly, I used to be able to access "Folder Options" in the Control Panel prior to Windows 10, IIRC, however, I used it so much and accessed it so many ways, that now it's rather rote routine. Also, when I upgraded to Windows 10 Pro from Windows 8.1 Pro, it retained most of my preferred file option settings, so not much of an issue here. -- I AM Bucky Breeder, (*(^; "Laissez les bons temps rouler!" .... and I approve this message! |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
Bucky Breeder wrote:
One way to resolve your stated example (puppiepoopoo.txt vs. puppiepoopoo.exe) is to navigate to "Folder Options" dialog and make a simple adjustment on the "View" tab. And how many times have I had to do that, Bucky ? Like, a gazillion times. Until I'm sick of doing it. That's the part which I object to. Having to do this over and over again, like a trained chimpanzee. Think of all the Geek Squad people who have to fix this over and over again, every day. Paul |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
Paul posted this via :
Bucky Breeder wrote: One way to resolve your stated example (puppiepoopoo.txt vs. puppiepoopoo.exe) is to navigate to "Folder Options" dialog and make a simple adjustment on the "View" tab. And how many times have I had to do that, Bucky ? Like, a gazillion times. Until I'm sick of doing it. That's the part which I object to. Having to do this over and over again, like a trained chimpanzee. Think of all the Geek Squad people who have to fix this over and over again, every day. I don't think we're talking about the same thing... There's a series of directions on how to get to the Folder Options applet or dialog... It's called "File Explorer Options" in the Windows 10 Control Panel. Once this applet renders, you click the "View" tab and you make the changes, the changes stick. At least they do on mine. Until I navigate back and make more changes... And if you're talking about retaining the settings when you upgrade to a newer Windows OS, they've always continued forward with me. I guess YMMV... -- I AM Bucky Breeder, (*(^; "Laissez les bons temps rouler!" .... and I approve this message! |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
On 01/09/2016 07:40 AM, Paul wrote:
Ken Springer wrote: As a matter of fact, there's even proof of this culpability in the default fileview options of "Hide known file type extensions" IIRC, this problem has been in EVERY version of Windows, and on by default. I find it a bit funny, how Microsoft will not fix certain things, in their development process. Some brain dead features just seem to migrate from OS to OS. Presumably they have a reason for doing that, but I cannot fathom what that reason might be. Say for example, I have dog****.txt dog****.exe and I'm in a freshly installed OS. I see dog**** --- funny indecipherable icon dog**** --- slightly different funny indecipherable icon and somehow I'm supposed to use my 20-20 vision to tell that one is a text file, the other is an EXE, and I shouldn't double-click the EXE by accident. Also, you can get an email attachment: dog****.txt.exe Where the extension (there is NEVER really more than one extension) is EXE, but you see dog****.txt And think it's safe so you run the malware. Note that Windows won't remove the TXT here since it knows that isn't the file extension. [snip] -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "Let him who would enjoy a good future waste none of his present." -- Roger Batson |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
On Fri, 08 Jan 2016 14:25:31 -0700, Ken Springer wrote:
On 1/5/16 5:07 PM, Johnny B Good wrote: Up until the advent of win98 and winME and winXP, MFST's main target market demographic had been the corporate and SME, user group (blessed with at least some training) and home user enthusiasts with at least *some* clue as to what a computer OS was all about (storage and manipulation of data - the 'D' in DOS standing in for the data storage part of the acronym). ====snip==== Except that the "D" in DOS is for Disk, not data. :-) Yes, but "Disk" is so much more succinct than "Storage medium which contains the programs and data organised in container files". A computer operating system is essentially all about data manipulation and its organisation. From the operator's point of view, an ergonomically efficient File Manager is *the* main essential feature to the make up of a good OS, something that rapidly started to disappear after win2k. -- Johnny B Good |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 13:02:58 -0600, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 01/09/2016 07:40 AM, Paul wrote: Ken Springer wrote: As a matter of fact, there's even proof of this culpability in the default fileview options of "Hide known file type extensions" IIRC, this problem has been in EVERY version of Windows, and on by default. I don't think the feature was always enabled by default, but I don't remember when it started. XP, perhaps? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Trust Your AV?
On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 09:45:02 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 13:02:58 -0600, Mark Lloyd wrote: On 01/09/2016 07:40 AM, Paul wrote: Ken Springer wrote: As a matter of fact, there's even proof of this culpability in the default fileview options of "Hide known file type extensions" IIRC, this problem has been in EVERY version of Windows, and on by default. I don't think the feature was always enabled by default, but I don't remember when it started. XP, perhaps? As I've already mentioned upthread, it definitely started with win95. I don't think it predated long filenames. Long filenames *and* hidden file name extensions are the worst possible combination you could have from a security point of view. -- Johnny B Good |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|