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
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 21:00:43 -0500, SilverSlimer wrote:
On 2018-11-21 6:57 p.m., Char Jackson wrote: On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 11:17:56 -0500, SilverSlimer wrote: On 2018-11-21 11:02 a.m., Weatherman wrote: ? Good Guy ? wrote: All the evidence suggests that you are jobless, high on drugs and habitual shop-lifter.* Who in their right mind would waste time on you!!!!!!. How charming. You must be a stupid Trumper. More than half of the United States Last I heard, Trump lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes. That doesn't sound like more than half. And how many of them were illegal voters, something that Democrats made sure would be able to vote during the midterms as well? Whether you like it or not, the Electoral College was designed to ensure that the entire country got a say over who the president was. There's a reason why IT was chosen over the popular vote because the founding fathers knew that it would otherwise result in places like New York and California, their cities being heavily populated and highly liberal, deciding the fate of the country regardless of what the smaller areas wanted. In Canada too, seats decide who leads the country and not the popular vote because pure Democracy is extremely flawed and very much prone to abuse as the Democrats keep showing us with their continued attempts to steal elections, many of which they _certainly_ stole in the midterms. Besides, the United States is a _republic_ so the very fact that you brought up "the popular vote" suggests that you have no idea how your country works and that you bought into the leftist excuse your media system has been pushing from day one as to why "The Chosen One" Hillary didn't win. Actually, I brought up the popular vote to point out that you were incorrect when you claimed that "More than half of the United States" voted for Trump. I know you meant eligible voters and not the entire US population, but it's still wrong. I could bring up the existence of the Electoral College, but it appears as if you've heard of it. That makes your claim above all the more puzzling. |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
On 11/21/18 04:31, Paul wrote:
Basically, I rely on your lack of "Safe Hex", to help me get what I need. You accept my Trojan Horse, and now I'm inside your perimeter. I've been calling that "Safe Surfing" for at least a decade. The rules are simple: a) don't surf the web or read e-mail with 'admin' login credentials b) don't use a Micro-shaft web browser c) If possible do your web surfing and e-mail reading with Linux or FreeBSD. or OSX. d) don't view mail as HTML. *EVAR*. And don't allow attachments to be previewed inline, either. e) if you MUST open an e-mail attachment, save it to disk first, THEN open it up with the proper application (the one that deals with that kind of file) using "file open" - do NOT trust "the shell" to do the right thing. AND SHUT OFF FREAKING MACROS IF IT IS WORD OR EXCEL! f) use a plugin similar to 'noscript' so that javascript ONLY runs for things you SPECIFICALLY want it to run with. (and so on) Do these things and you should NEVAR have to waste any money, bandwidth, or CPU time on virus scanners because those won't stop 'zero-day's but "Safe Surfing" JUST MIGHT! -- (aka 'Bombastic Bob' in case you wondered) 'Feeling with my fingers, and thinking with my brain' - me 'your story is so touching, but it sounds just like a lie' "Straighten up and fly right" |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
Wolf K wrote:
See also Bob Henson's post Shields Up, and I quote: Visit Gibson research, run Shields Up and it will tell you if you have anything to worry about. The probability is that you don't. https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?bh0bkyd2 That will do a probe from outside in. If will find if there are listeners on your host but you'll have to test the complete range of ports (64K of them). If you want to check what are the inside out connections, you need a tool on your intranet host (e.g., SysInternals TCP View, Nirsoft SmartSniff or CurrPorts, Wireshark, a 3rd party firewall to show current outbound connections or history). Shields Up will check at the time you check but that may not be when you have listener processes running on your host. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
On 22/11/2018 10:18, VanguardLH wrote:
Wolf K wrote: See also Bob Henson's post Shields Up, and I quote: Visit Gibson research, run Shields Up and it will tell you if you have anything to worry about. The probability is that you don't. https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?bh0bkyd2 That will do a probe from outside in. If will find if there are listeners on your host but you'll have to test the complete range of ports (64K of them). If you want to check what are the inside out connections, you need a tool on your intranet host (e.g., SysInternals TCP View, Nirsoft SmartSniff or CurrPorts, Wireshark, a 3rd party firewall to show current outbound connections or history). Agreed 100% Shields Up will check at the time you check but that may not be when you have listener processes running on your host. FYI, when I use Shields Up in normal course, I have no open ports. When using a VPN, however, a number of ports ARE shown to be open. Is this to be expected? If so, why? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- GRC Port Authority Report created on UTC: 2018-11-22 at 12:26:00 Results from scan of ports: 0, 21-23, 25, 79, 80, 110, 113, 119, 135, 139, 143, 389, 443, 445, 1002, 1024-1030, 1720, 5000 2 Ports Open 23 Ports Closed 1 Ports Stealth --------------------- 26 Ports Tested Ports found to be OPEN we 80, 443 The port found to be STEALTH was: 139 Other than what is listed above, all ports are CLOSED. TruStealth: FAILED - NOT all tested ports were STEALTH, - NO unsolicited packets were received, - A PING REPLY (ICMP Echo) WAS RECEIVED. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
I.Mackie wrote:
when I use Shields Up in normal course, I have no open ports. When you don't have a VPN active SheildsUp tests your IP address When using a VPN, however, a number of ports ARE shown to be open. Is this to be expected? If so, why? With an active VPN connection, ShieldsUp will test your VPN provider's IP address, so it sees ports 80 and 443 of your VPN provider's web server. A bit worrying that they have port 139 open to the world though ... |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
Andy Burns wrote:
A bit worrying that they have port 139 open to the world though ... Forget that, it says "stealth" so they've probably explicitly blocked netbios rather than just dropping it ... |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
"I.Mackie" wrote
| Words from Apple recently:- | | Today, individuals, communities, and nations depend on the security and | integrity of our shared technological infrastructure. We at Apple hold | this responsibility sacrosanct, and we will continue to dedicate intense | focus on keeping ahead of the hackers, cybercriminals, and even nation | states that hope to steal data and harm user faith in the potential of | technology to build a better world. | He's even more saintly than Zuck. Zuck just plans to save the world by getting more rich selling ads. This guy wants to save the world by selling Apple products. He's almost as saintly as our hero, the squealingly noble Timmy Cook, who champions goodness, virtue, safety, gorgeous product design, your good health, slave labor, incompatibility design, no freedom of self repair,and tax evasion. And he's beautifully blended emotional trigger marketing with the Apple credo. (Is everyone at Apple a salesman?): People are too stupid and computing is to dangerous. The only solution is for Apple to control and oversee all computing. For the sake of the world... Or, leastways, for the sake of the people who are stupid and rich enough to buy new Apple stuff on a regular basis. AOL never died. They just became a sleazy device company. But you do make a point. Many of the people I know who switched to Apple did it because they didn't want to have to understand Windows security. They just wanted to shop without worries. (The rest probably switched because "everyone else was switching and I felt embarassed sitting in Starbucks with my Dell".) As the younger generation comes up, less of them think of a computer as anything more than a consumption device. So Apple makes sense. Google/Android is now learning the same lesson with their phones that MS learned with computers: Usability comes with risks. And risks can lower profits. People who use devices mainly for "services" don't want hassles. They want restaurant reviews and Uber rides. As Lord Jobs said when his architect asked about whether the windows should open in his new donut HQ building: No. If you let people open things they just break them. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
In article , Mayayana
wrote: [There was a darkly humorous example awhile back. A couple of undisputable winners were flying their private plane to a private luxury cabin getaway, for a private, luxury, hunting cabin weekend. The cabin owner turned on the heat via his iPhone during the trip, so the cabin would be toasty when they arrived. Very slick. These are winners, after all. Their whole life is slick.They arrived at the cabin. Both were dead within minutes. A squirrel had set up house in the furnace vent and the CO alarm wasn't working. The two men were suffocated by high CO levels when they walked into the house, probably passing out before they even had time to think.] that story does not add up. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
"Mathedman" wrote in message
... On 11/21/2018 5:34 AM, wrote: What's to prevent the bad guys from accessing my hard drive via my IP address? SS How do they get through your router? Exactly. The NAT (network address translation) software in a router should prevent any unsolicited traffic from reaching one of the PCs on the LAN. If your PC requests information (eg a web page, or a list of emails to be downloaded) the reply will be routed to the PC because it is in response to a request that the PC has made. If any other traffic arrives at the router, it will not be in response to a request so it will be discarded. Of course, that doesn't stop a rogue piece of software on the PC (a virus) from issuing a request which allows a connection to be made between the PC and an external computer, but that is covered by having good spyware and anti-virus software. Also you may set up a static WAN-to-LAN route (port forwarding) in the router, in which case you have created a back door: then you place more reliance on the PC's security to trap malicious traffic. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
Mathedman wrote:
wrote: What's to prevent the bad guys from accessing my hard drive via my IP address? How do the get through your router? UPnP, if that is enabled on the router ans some malware is installed and has requested a port be opened for it ... |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 14:04:42 +0000, Stephen Wolstenholme
wrote: On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 08:18:27 -0500, wrote: Just concerned about my banking and associated password files tx SS You should use a more secure password and don't put it in a file. Steve As we say in our computer club, "Put it on a piece of paper and put it in your underwear drawer where you will always fling it!" I use Windows Defender along with Malewarebytes Premium. Ben |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
I ask out of ignorance
On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 16:21:48 -0000, "NY" wrote:
"Mathedman" wrote in message ... On 11/21/2018 5:34 AM, wrote: What's to prevent the bad guys from accessing my hard drive via my IP address? SS How do they get through your router? Exactly. The NAT (network address translation) software in a router should prevent any unsolicited traffic from reaching one of the PCs on the LAN. If your PC requests information (eg a web page, or a list of emails to be downloaded) the reply will be routed to the PC because it is in response to a request that the PC has made. If any other traffic arrives at the router, it will not be in response to a request so it will be discarded. Minor clarification: NAT provides absolutely no security at all. That's not its function. NAT simply 'translates' one destination address to another destination address. The part that provides security is the stateful firewall that's usually present in the NAT router. The behavior of the stateful firewall is what's being accurately described above. Of course, that doesn't stop a rogue piece of software on the PC (a virus) from issuing a request which allows a connection to be made between the PC and an external computer, but that is covered by having good spyware and anti-virus software. Also you may set up a static WAN-to-LAN route (port forwarding) in the router, in which case you have created a back door: then you place more reliance on the PC's security to trap malicious traffic. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|