In the pre-Internet days I had a client who would unplug his modem between =

PCAnywhere sessions. =0A=0A--- On Tue, 4/14/09, mike@mikewohlrab.com <mike@=

mikewohlrab.com> wrote:=0A=0A> From: mike@mikewohlrab.com <mike@mikewohlrab=

.com>=0A> Subject: Re: [NF] more secure or less threats?=0A> To: profox@lea=

fe.com=0A> Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 10:19 AM=0A> If you really want t=

o make your=0A> computer secure, just unplug that black cable that runs fro=

m=0A> the wall outlet to your power supply on your pc. I am fairly=0A> cert=

ain that that would make it nearly impossible for your=0A> pc to become inf=

ected with a virus!=0A> =0A> Mike=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> Sent from my Verizon W=

ireless BlackBerry=0A> =0A> -----Original Message-----=0A> From: "Gil Hale =

RR" <mrgmhale@rochester.rr.com>=0A> =0A> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 10:10:24 =

=0A> To: <profoxtech@leafe.com>=0A> Subject: RE: [NF] more secure or less t=

hreats?=0A> =0A> =0A> I suppose that if I ran all the "protections" within =

Vista=0A> made available,=0A> and hung my AntiVirus/AntiMalware/AntiAnti ap=

ps onto the=0A> machine, along with=0A> both a hardware and software firewa=

ll that really tightened=0A> things down I=0A> could perhaps still be able =

to read from, and maybe even=0A> still write to, the=0A> files on my own lo=

cal hard drive.=A0 Maybe I could even=0A> read or play various=0A> CD or DV=

D media.=A0 But would I be able to do anything=0A> effective with=0A> conne=

ctivity to a network, to include Internet=0A> access?=A0 I am surmising the=

=0A> level of "security" has a lot to do with the ability of the=0A> machin=

e to do=0A> anything at all, other than open a few local, benign and=0A> re=

latively useless=0A> apps.=A0 "It is totally secure, but it does not do=0A>=

anything that could hurt=0A> it.=A0 It does not run."=0A> =0A> A Windows m=

achine that is so hamstrung that it is indeed=0A> "secure", yet can't=0A> b=

e used for much of anything, is not of any value to=0A> me.=A0 When I run m=

y=0A> Linux and Mac OS X machines I fear nothing, other than the=0A> possib=

ility of a=0A> hardware failure.=A0 But I keep things backed up on a=0A> sc=

heduled basis, so the=0A> exposure to loss of data is at least as minimal a=

s with my=0A> Windows based=0A> machines that I keep backed up to an almost=

insane=0A> degree.=A0 I trust the=0A> security on my Linux and Mac machine=

s, as it is inherently=0A> built into the=0A> very core of the OS, as oppos=

ed to the Windows bolt-on, add=0A> apps, based=0A> "security solution" afte=

rthought.=A0 I still do not=0A> trust security on my=0A> Windows machines, =

despite all the protections I have in=0A> place, as I know=0A> something ca=

n still sneak into my machinery if I am=0A> careless with the web=0A> sites=

I visit.=0A> =0A> I wonder if anyone is going to challenge MS's claim that=

=0A> Vista and W7 are=0A> the most secure OS platforms on the planet.=A0 I =

guess a=0A> clever attorney for=0A> MS would say, "He never said which plan=

et, did he?"=0A> <g>=0A> =0A> =0A> Gil=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> > -----=

Original Message-----=0A> > From: profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com=0A> [mailto:=

profoxtech-=0A> > bounces@leafe.com]=0A> On Behalf Of Stephen Russell=0A> >=

Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 9:48 AM=0A> > To: profoxtech@leafe.com=0A> >=

Subject: [NF] more secure or less threats?=0A> > =0A> > <http://blogs.zdne=

t.com/hardware/?p=3D4146&tag=3Dnl.e539>=0A> > =0A> > "Secure" is a mindset,=

and not an actual state,=0A> right?=0A> > =0A> > Things change in the indu=

stry as well as new threats=0A> detected.=A0 How=0A> > fast the "vendors" ;=

-> roll with those threats.=0A> > =0A> > --=0A> > Stephen Russell=0A> > Sr.=

Production Systems Programmer=0A> > Web and Windows Development=0A> > Inde=

pendent Contractor=0A> > Memphis TN=0A> > =0A> > 901.246-0159=0A> > =0A> [e=

xcessive quoting removed by server]=0A> =0A> ______________________________=

_________________=0A> Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com=0A> Subscription M=

aintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox=0A> OT-free version of=

this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech=0A> Searchable Arc=

hive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox=0A> This message: http://leaf=

e.com/archives/byMID/profox/020101c9bd0a$c13a5d00$43af1700$@rr.com=0A> ** A=

ll postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are=0A> the opinions of th=

e author, and do not constitute legal or=0A> medical advice. This statement=

is added to the messages for=0A> those lawyers who are too stupid to see t=

he obvious.=0A> =0A> Report [OT] Abuse: http://leafe.com/reportAbuse/020101=

c9bd0a$c13a5d00$43af1700$@rr.com=0A> ______________________________________=

_________=0A> Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com=0A> Subscription Maintenan=

ce: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox=0A> OT-free version of this li=

st: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech=0A> Searchable Archive: ht=

tp://leafe.com/archives/search/profox=0A> This message: http://leafe.com/ar=

chives/byMID/profox/380486227-1239718775-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.r=

im.net-536717463-@bxe1099.bisx.prod.on.blackberry=0A> ** All postings, unle=

ss explicitly stated otherwise, are=0A> the opinions of the author, and do =

not constitute legal or=0A> medical advice. This statement is added to the =

messages for=0A> those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.=0A>