Author: Gil Hale RR
Posted: 2009-04-14 at 10:24:10
Unless I have a head cold and sneeze on it, at which point it could cause an
infection with others...
Gil
> -----Original Message-----
> From: profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profoxtech-
> bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf Of mike@mikewohlrab.com
> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:20 AM
> To: profoxtech@leafe.com
> Subject: Re: [NF] more secure or less threats?
>
> If you really want to make your computer secure, just unplug that black
> cable that runs from the wall outlet to your power supply on your pc. I
> am fairly certain that that would make it nearly impossible for your pc
> to become infected with a virus!
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Gil Hale RR" <mrgmhale@rochester.rr.com>
>
> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 10:10:24
> To: <profoxtech@leafe.com>
> Subject: RE: [NF] more secure or less threats?
>
>
> I suppose that if I ran all the "protections" within Vista made
> available,
> and hung my AntiVirus/AntiMalware/AntiAnti apps onto the machine, along
> with
> both a hardware and software firewall that really tightened things down
> I
> could perhaps still be able to read from, and maybe even still write
> to, the
> files on my own local hard drive. Maybe I could even read or play
> various
> CD or DVD media. But would I be able to do anything effective with
> connectivity to a network, to include Internet access? I am surmising
> the
> level of "security" has a lot to do with the ability of the machine to
> do
> anything at all, other than open a few local, benign and relatively
> useless
> apps. "It is totally secure, but it does not do anything that could
> hurt
> it. It does not run."
>
> A Windows machine that is so hamstrung that it is indeed "secure", yet
> can't
> be used for much of anything, is not of any value to me. When I run my
> Linux and Mac OS X machines I fear nothing, other than the possibility
> of a
> hardware failure. But I keep things backed up on a scheduled basis, so
> the
> exposure to loss of data is at least as minimal as with my Windows
> based
> machines that I keep backed up to an almost insane degree. I trust the
> security on my Linux and Mac machines, as it is inherently built into
> the
> very core of the OS, as opposed to the Windows bolt-on, add apps, based
> "security solution" afterthought. I still do not trust security on my
> Windows machines, despite all the protections I have in place, as I
> know
> something can still sneak into my machinery if I am careless with the
> web
> sites I visit.
>
> I wonder if anyone is going to challenge MS's claim that Vista and W7
> are
> the most secure OS platforms on the planet. I guess a clever attorney
> for
> MS would say, "He never said which planet, did he?" <g>
>
>
> Gil
>
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profoxtech-
> > bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Stephen Russell
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 9:48 AM
> > To: profoxtech@leafe.com
> > Subject: [NF] more secure or less threats?
> >
> > <http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=4146&tag=nl.e539>
> >
> > "Secure" is a mindset, and not an actual state, right?
> >
> > Things change in the industry as well as new threats detected. How
> > fast the "vendors" ;-> roll with those threats.
> >
> > --
> > Stephen Russell
> > Sr. Production Systems Programmer
> > Web and Windows Development
> > Independent Contractor
> > Memphis TN
> >
> > 901.246-0159
> >
[excessive quoting removed by server]