Home PC protection

[Renaissance]

if you are keen send me your email

you might want to edit showing the @ symbol of your email address to (at) because of all the spam bots out there.

 

[observer]

Thanks Deckard. I've sent you email :)

anart, I will take a look at the materials dealing with self-importance. Thanks! I also feel that challenging someone in a way here manifested (referring to Color) is a concealed version of self-importance.

 

[Color]

Thanks Deckard. I've sent you email :)

anart, I will take a look at the materials dealing with self-importance. Thanks! I also feel that challenging someone in a way here manifested (referring to Color) is a concealed version of self-importance.

Thank you for analyzing me. I can learn much from that act of yours.

 

[Mark]

I'm not sure how advising someone about open-source community OS security strenghts have anything to do with self importance.

As was pointed out you seem to have some emotional investment regarding your choice to use Linux, or a lack of knowledge regarding how software works internally - mostly likely both.

You said that stuff like viruses and trojans and adware aren't a problem on Linux, and that's simply not true. Even the article you linked to states clearly that there are Linux viruses. If you knew what a trojan does then you'd know that they can and do exist for Linux systems. Same goes for adware and just about any other problem that plagues Windows.

So you asking "disinfo? please explain" points out that you're not paying attention. Your statements were incorrect and so you spread some disinformation - incorrect information - that could harm people who might believe what you say. Since you spread disinformation you had little concern about the safety others and that's essentially you acting out of self-importance. What you think is more important to you than how what you think might endanger or harm other people in this case.

 

[observer]

From that same article:

This sort of social engineering, so easy to accomplish in Windows, requires far more steps and far greater effort on the part of the Linux user. Instead of just reading an email (... just reading an email?!?), a Linux user would have to read the email, save the attachment, give the attachment executable permissions, and then run the executable. Even as less sophisticated users begin to migrate to Linux, they may not understand exactly why they can't just execute attachments, but they will still have to go through the steps. As Martha Stewart would say, this is a good thing. Further, due to the strong community around Linux, new users will receive education and encouragement in areas such as email security that are currently lacking in the Windows world, which should help to alleviate any concerns on the part of newbies.

Further, due to the strong separation between normal users and the privileged root user, our Linux user would have to be running as root to really do any damage to the system. He could damage his /home directory, but that's about it. So the above steps now become the following: read, save, become root, give executable permissions, run. The more steps, the less likely a virus infection becomes, and certainly the less likely a catastrophically spreading virus becomes. And since Linux users are taught from the get-go to never run as root, and since Mac OS X doesn't even allow users to use the root account unless they first enable the option, it's obvious the likelihood of email-driven viruses and worms lessens on those platforms.

Unfortunately, running as root (or Administrator) is common in the Windows world. In fact, Microsoft is still engaging in this risky behavior. Windows XP, supposed Microsoft's most secure desktop operating system, automatically makes the first named user of the system an Administrator, with the power to do anything he wants to the computer. The reasons for this decision boggle the mind. With all the lost money and productivity over the last decade caused by countless Microsoft-borne viruses and worms, you'd think the company could have changed its procedures in this area, but no.

Even if the OS has been set up correctly, with an Administrator account and a non-privileged user account, things are still not copasetic. On a Windows system, programs installed by a non-Administrative user can still add DLLs and other system files that can be run at a level of permission that damages the system itself. Even worse, the collection of files on a Windows system - the operating system, the applications, and the user data - can't be kept apart from each other. Things are intermingled to a degree that makes it unlikely that they will ever be satisfactorily sorted out in any sensibly secure fashion.

As was pointed out you seem to have some emotional investment regarding your choice to use Linux, or a lack of knowledge regarding how software works internally - mostly likely both.

You said that stuff like viruses and trojans and adware aren't a problem on Linux, and that's simply not true. Even the article you linked to states clearly that there are Linux viruses. If you knew what a trojan does then you'd know that they can and do exist for Linux systems. Same goes for adware and just about any other problem that plagues Windows.

I've said that Linux is a way more secure alternative than commercial OSes. I also said that in contemporal Ubuntu distribution there is NO viruses, trojans etc. because the root account is disabled : _http://www.debianadmin.com/enable-and-disable-ubuntu-root-password.html

I think that a good thing to do is to have some reasonable experience time with actual software before accusing someone for spreading disinformation and making layman statements.

 

[anart]

anart, I will take a look at the materials dealing with self-importance. Thanks! I also feel that challenging someone in a way here manifested (referring to Color) is a concealed version of self-importance.

As always in the Work we do here, it is imperative that you examine the beam of wood in your own eye before pointing out the speck in someone else's. Your responses to and about Color have come across as a rather childish 'tit for tat' - it might serve you well to pay less attention to Color and more attention to yourself.

As far as this statement:

I think that a good thing to do is to have some reasonable experience time with actual software before accusing someone for spreading disinformation and making layman statements.

You have spoken in an arrogant manner, out of ignorance. I'll let Mark clear things up for you more if he so chooses.

 

[dant]

[oh! I guess many have written before I had a chance to review and before replying,
oh well, here it is, fwiw.]

Well, Color, in an interesting way, you started off with a comment about not trusting
your computer, and had problems losing files and data even with a BU solution of an
undefined kind, and persons repairing your PC and all that, but I noticed right away
that the OS was not defined at that point. Name replied from a Microsoft OS point
of view as to the specific security software he was proposing that you should install,
and clearly that was a 'Windows' leaning. I followed by proposing a backup solution,
but also from a Windows point of view. So it seems that you were indeed running a
Windows platform, in the way you responded, or so I think.

Then 'Observer' chimed in with 'Linux' as if to imply, "this is a better Operating
System from a security point of view", followed by 'Mark' being in agreement of
the same, or so it seems.

For as long as I have been around computers, managing them, developing them
(hardware and software), and so on, I constantly hear about the OS "wars", one
person espousing one kind against another - and the debate is endless, and pointless.
Life is a religion or so it seems, and you have your proponents and opponents no matter
what is being discussed, OSIT.

I would say, that since you may already own Windows OS (of any distro), then secure
it and likewise if you own Linux (of any distro), secure it, and in general if you have ANY
OS running, secure it especially if you plan to expose it to the public highway (Internet).
Go with what you are familiar with and learn it well. Interesting, that we are told to
know our machine and to know it well, and to control it best as we can. Similarities
anyone? ;)

What *many* people fail to ask themselves is: "How important is your data in terms
of security and/or recovery?" Many people failed to ask themselves of this question
and have completely lost their data and have been emotionally devastated, and I have
seen this in others including myself. It is an awful feeling but then again, does it really
matter anyway since you cannot do *anything* about it, except to pick up the pieces as
best as you can? Sometime careful administration does you no good at all. Such as the
case when I was comfortable in trying to recover critical data from 5 years ago only to
discover that my backup tape corroded and turned to "dust" or it simply snapped mid-way
and got chewed up in the tape drive. Sigh... sometimes you get the bear and sometimes
the bear gets you!

If you have not played around with Linux or any Unix OS in general, be aware that it has a high
learning curve. Most of the setup/installs, configurations, tuning, administrative stuff requires a
lot of patience, a lot of reading, and remembering the details on what depends on what and their
inter-relationships with one another. It is not *that* easy to do, and takes some time to get used
to, its nuances, especially at the command-line level, but then again, any OS has its similarities
and its differences. With that said, I tend view an OS (and software, in general) as a tool and it
depends on what you wish the computer and it's software to do for you, but whatever your reasons,
it is, but a personal choice.

Saying Linux (of any distro) is more secure than Windows, or MAC, or whatever depends on what
you are talking about and who and what is being secured. Security is only as good as the person
administrating it and being in control of *all* data put into it. In fact it is almost impossible to control
each and every piece of data put into the system since there is a bit of 'trust' or 'gut' feeling with the
vendor of choice you have selected, and more importantly, it depends wholly on your knowledge of
all things related to computers and then some.

OSIT

 

[Mark]

From that same article:

This sort of social engineering, so easy to accomplish in Windows, requires far more steps and far greater effort on the part of the Linux user.

Spreading disinfo is social engineering also. You've fallen victim, and now you're spreading the problem by spreading disinfo. For a person using the nickname 'observer' you sure aren't observing objective reality as best you could.

Further, due to the strong separation between normal users and the privileged root user, our Linux user would have to be running as root to really do any damage to the system. He could damage his /home directory, but that's about it. So the above steps now become the following: read, save, become root, give executable permissions, run. The more steps, the less likely a virus infection becomes, and certainly the less likely a catastrophically spreading virus becomes. And since Linux users are taught from the get-go to never run as root, and since Mac OS X doesn't even allow users to use the root account unless they first enable the option, it's obvious the likelihood of email-driven viruses and worms lessens on those platforms.

Unfortunately, running as root (or Administrator) is common in the Windows world. In fact, Microsoft is still engaging in this risky behavior. Windows XP, supposed Microsoft's most secure desktop operating system, automatically makes the first named user of the system an Administrator, with the power to do anything he wants to the computer. The reasons for this decision boggle the mind. With all the lost money and productivity over the last decade caused by countless Microsoft-borne viruses and worms, you'd think the company could have changed its procedures in this area, but no.

Even if the OS has been set up correctly, with an Administrator account and a non-privileged user account, things are still not copasetic. On a Windows system, programs installed by a non-Administrative user can still add DLLs and other system files that can be run at a level of permission that damages the system itself. Even worse, the collection of files on a Windows system - the operating system, the applications, and the user data - can't be kept apart from each other. Things are intermingled to a degree that makes it unlikely that they will ever be satisfactorily sorted out in any sensibly secure fashion.

As was pointed out you seem to have some emotional investment regarding your choice to use Linux, or a lack of knowledge regarding how software works internally - mostly likely both.

You said that stuff like viruses and trojans and adware aren't a problem on Linux, and that's simply not true. Even the article you linked to states clearly that there are Linux viruses. If you knew what a trojan does then you'd know that they can and do exist for Linux systems. Same goes for adware and just about any other problem that plagues Windows.

The article you quote was written in 2003. Good morning, it's 2007 and the article is no longer applicable as a comparison against the latest release of Windows.

You are firmly invested in 'being right' which also means that you're not being open, so the new data I offered (that Linux is subject to the same problems as Windows) bounced right off your brain.

So you're defending your perspective by ignoring data, which incidentally is a root of ignorance. No offense intended. I'm point out facts.

I've said that Linux is a way more secure alternative than commercial OSes. I also said that in contemporal Ubuntu distribution there is NO viruses, trojans etc. because the root account is disabled : _http://www.debianadmin.com/enable-and-disable-ubuntu-root-password.html

What you wrote exactly is :

I reccomend Ubuntu Linux. [snip] With this operating system there are no viruses, no adware, no dialers, no trojans etc. Cheers !

And that latter statement is not true. So you spread disinfo. That's very irresponsible - and curable if you take the time to do your homework.

It's important to learn how to recognize your own emotional investment if you intend to participate here over the long run. There's nothing wrong with admitting you're wrong. Of course you need data to see that, and willingness to see yourself first. That's a big part of what we do here.

 

[Mark]

Then 'Observer' chimed in with 'Linux' as if to imply, "this is a better Operating
System from a security point of view", followed by 'Mark' being in agreement of
the same, or so it seems.

Re-read what I wrote to learn that I didn't agree with 'observer'.

 

[Mikey]

... but I do use it for kind of a journal and all the things I'm reading, regarding this SOTT site and C's, and translations, and losing all that material would be very painful, as I've experienced it twice in the past.

Could someone recommend me what steps to take in order to "clean" any potential stuff placed on my PC, or how to check if there's some "noise" on it, kind of the one which would aloud other person to enter my documents via online remote PC? Is that something that can easily be done just with simple virus-scan? Is that all?

Hi Color!

I'm replying to your first post.

I would prefer a backup solution rather than antivirus or firewall software or recommending a particular OS. I store my personal data on an external USB harddrive. Operating Systems may get damaged from time to time, or change completely. I also back up the OS. Also consider that all data is always stored PHYSICALLY. In case of a harddrive failure even a super secure Unix system is rendered useless!!!

So, you might want to consider making regular backups of your personal data on two or more external devices or DVD media and store them at different places, protected against e.g. theft or fire. In case you use an external harddrive I recommend FAT32 file system for inter-OS compatibilty - you can access and copy your files even with old DOS startdisks.

No operating system or application software can be 100% pure (or without "noise" as you put it). There are ALWAYS security issues. The point to consider is: Which case is more probable to happen: hacker or virus intrusion, software or hardware failure? With backups, you are protected against all cases.

Preventing hackers from accessing your computer is a whole different thing osit.

Quoting tomsrtbt (http www toms.net/rb) :

Don't delay! Make backups NOW!

 

[observer]

mark, let the readers interested in this subject decide what is right.

 

[Mark]

mark, let the readers interested in this subject decide what is right.

We don't allow anyone to trounce into this forum and say whatever they feel like saying only to let other people decide what is 'right', as you put it. We share information, question each other, point out each other's mistakes, and try to arrive at Truth.

Doing what you suggest is no different than what's happening on the world stage, is it? And what is the result of that sort of mess? Can you even see it? That tactic doesn't allow people to learn to see OBJECTIVE REALITY. So you're basically trying to perpetuate a major problem that most of us here would like to free ourselves of.

Very often someone says something here - as you did - that needs correction, which of course requires FACTS.

What I find interesting about you right now, 'observer,' is that when someone (me in this instance) offered information that contradicts your own point of view you didn't ask any questions. Instead you decided that you already know all you need to know.

If you think you'll be able to hang around this forum and say whatever you want without having any of your mistaken information called out then you're fooling yourself. We all make mistakes. However not everyone is capable of allowing others to point out mistakes, and not everyone is capable of admitting those mistakes, and not everyone is capable of correcting their mistakes.

If you're not interested in learning to see objective reality then this forum is not the place for you.

 

[dant]

Then 'Observer' chimed in with 'Linux' as if to imply, "this is a better Operating
System from a security point of view", followed by 'Mark' being in agreement of
the same, or so it seems.

Re-read what I wrote to learn that I didn't agree with 'observer'.

All of those things are possible with Linux. Be careful not to spread such disinfo!

Ok, I interpreted the two sentences above as to mean, that many things are
possible with Linux followed by an indirection of the second sentence as if to
mean "spread the word!". But with your clarification as if not to be in agreement
and your further replies, I stand corrected! I should have used Occam's Razor.

 

[Beau]

mark, let the readers interested in this subject decide what is right.

As far as I can tell, mark IS a reader that is interested in this subject. What makes you think otherwsie? Also, it seems you avoided all the points that mark raised in his latest reply. Instead, you post the above, which is really like saying "I'm avoiding what you are saying and will only listen to other people."

 

[Color]

I would prefer a backup solution rather than antivirus or firewall software or recommending a particular OS. I store my personal data on an external USB harddrive. Operating Systems may get damaged from time to time, or change completely. I also back up the OS. Also consider that all data is always stored PHYSICALLY. In case of a harddrive failure even a super secure Unix system is rendered useless!!!

So, you might want to consider making regular backups of your personal data on two or more external devices or DVD media and store them at different places, protected against e.g. theft or fire. In case you use an external harddrive I recommend FAT32 file system for inter-OS compatibilty - you can access and copy your files even with old DOS startdisks.

I checked FAT32 file system, and since my OP is Windows XP professional (as I forgot to give that fact earlier, sorry everyone)
I found that there are some "Limitations of the FAT32 File System in Windows XP" (_http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463)
and it's too complicated terminology for my knowledge at the moment,
to understand correctly if that makes it too complicated for me to use it, or is it just some standard stuff?
But I'll go with an external drive as a BU option, for sure.
As I mentioned before, lots of my BU DVDs didn't wanna work either,
no idea why, so I'm making 3 copies of everything at the moment,
and that is simply ridiculous, so I'll buy external drive

No operating system or application software can be 100% pure (or without "noise" as you put it).
There are ALWAYS security issues. The point to consider is: Which case is more probable to happen: hacker or virus intrusion, software or hardware failure? With backups, you are protected against all cases.

Preventing hackers from accessing your computer is a whole different thing osit.

Beside my worries of losing data there's also a big issue of me worrying
my privacy could be violated, and not just from some random hacker,
but in a way of one person reading my private stuff and documents,
which could then be used against me, within my circle of friends,
as twisted upside down and adding some things I never said/ment,
to get a totally new meaning and direction, as it was done before in the past,
from that one person which was going through my things and my PC.

I am still clearing some of that mess up and it's a very bad situation,
trying to explain something that seems like been coming from me, while it was not.
People get hurt and won't listen explanations and facts easely...
It takes out a lot of energy to make it all OK again :(

So, I hope all this will help me to maintain my data and to protect myself
in the best possible way.. The rest is out of my hands, I guess.

Thank you for your help :)