is it safe to use limewire?

[Guest]

Northerntravel.net and Northerntravel.co.uk is a premier online travel
planning and flight-booking site. You are able to purchase airline tickets
onlinen, find vacation package and make hotel and car reservations, find
maps, destination information, travel news and more. Don't forget to use
discount code 149395. We can also be reached by calling either 800-780-5733
in the U.S. and Canada or 00-800-11-20-11-40 in Europe.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Northerntravel.net and Northerntravel.co.uk is a premier online travel
planning and flight-booking site. You are able to purchase airline tickets
onlinen, find vacation package and make hotel and car reservations, find
maps, destination information, travel news and more. Don't forget to use
discount code 149395. We can also be reached by calling either 800-780-5733
in the U.S. and Canada or 00-800-11-20-11-40 in Europe.

Holy Non Sequitur, Batman!

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

 

[q_q_anonymous]

Oh, how about I agree with that view and I should have said "Anyone
using LimeWire without understanding the threat that it presents to
their system, without understanding the threat that many files they
would download could present to their system, should just not use any
P2P application."

I agree with that, I think that's vvery fair

Except the people that already understand the threat and what to do to
avoid the threats would have ignored my post to start with - they
understand the target.

Yes,
Mostly, yes.

Though I was also considering the possibility that some people reading
have the potential to be a techie / have a techie mind, but just hasn't
run into a PTP program before..
There was a time when I didn't have a computer, somebody talked about
windows, then said "you know what windows is?" I wasn't quite sure..
I'd have rather not been given misinformation. This may be the case
with almost any new techniology or software.
And many people delayed using Win xp for years.. It's easy for even a
techie to fall behind, moerso for somebody who merely has a techie
brain and wouldn't want misinformation!

Still.. even aside from that problem. I think it's better in a
techinical newsgroup to write without dumbingg things down. And then if
things need to be explained, they should.
So they have the chance to move up a level. + catering for technical
readers..
Similarly, telling that limewire is not ok if they don't understand the
thread. Or is ok if they do understand the threat.. is good, becuase it
lets them move up a level, without stunting their technical development.

 

[Leythos]

Still.. even aside from that problem. I think it's better in a
techinical newsgroup to write without dumbingg things down. And then if
things need to be explained, they should.
So they have the chance to move up a level. + catering for technical
readers..
Similarly, telling that limewire is not ok if they don't understand the
thread. Or is ok if they do understand the threat.. is good, becuase it
lets them move up a level, without stunting their technical development.

The problem is that many of these groups are read on Forums instead of
Usenet, and many people don't really care about being technical - they
have a one-hit post, is Limewire safe to use.....

Kind of like my brother-inlaw installing my mother-inlaw's computer
before I got back instate. He thought he was technical, owns several
MAC's and a W98 PC and reads technical articles.... Needless to say, in
the three weeks it was setup, before I got home and could look at it,
she had over 200 serious malware items on it - I flattened it and put
the router (that was sitting in the box on the desk) between her PC and
the Cable Modem, installed good AV software, setup a limited user
accounts.... She's used it now for almost a full year without a single
problem - and neither she or the bother-inlaw know any more than before
I fixed the problem - they just don't really care about how/why as long
as it works.

So, when people tell one-hit-posters that Limewire (any P2P) software is
bad and a sure fire way to compromise their computers, well, it's a good
bet that it will happen. If they are smart enough to question this, then
we may get them the technical skills (or almost) to not get compromised,
but with all the crap out there, and all the CODEC sites with malware in
them, it's still a very good chance they are going to get compromised.

 

[q_q_anonymous]

Yes, I know how the Internet "works." You clearly do not.

There's a vast difference in accessing a networked file server that's
been specifically designed and configured for that specific purpose,
with specifically tailored security safeguards maintained by skilled
professionals, and opening up one's personal hard drive to strangers
mostly bent on acquiring illicit copies of software.

you seriously oversnipped. I wasn't saying there wasn't a difference.
Between PTP on your computer and google on google's computers, in
terms of danger.

I was just attacking your argument. which was that the erason why PTP
was unsafe was that the PTP user is making their computer insecure
because they let others access their hard drive.

I'm glad you now agree with me, by admitting that the people at Google
are fairly safe because they know how to secure their web servers.
That logic was missing from your argument .
Similarly, limewire is not inherently unsafe.

A person using limewire may also be reasonably safe. If he doesn't
download and run anything malicious. Adn if he does, he can learn not
to - if he is willing. I still wouldn't say he shouldn't use limewire.
Maybe he wants to download his music as much as he wants to browse the
web.

These are technical issues, and your terminology
"tailored security safeguards maintained by skilled professionals".
and
" opening up one's personal hard drive to strangers "

is quite non technical for a computer related newsgroup!!!

perhaps the former statement you made about security, was out of scope
of this newsgruop. Perhaps. But then so was the question.. And perhaps
so was the questioner. So, putting that one aside..

But the latter statement you made " opening up one's personal hard
drive to strangers ", that's just worse than insanely untechnical,
that's in the extreme. And That's FUD too. Infact, you did use the
term "wide open" to refer to a server. Sounds a bit like Mr Stealth -
Steve Gibson's propaganda , you should know his words, they include "
I set up a deliberate disinformation campaign from the beginning " !!.
His information is not good to use as authoritative. And he targets
computer techies so he careful..

Now onto your claim again, the opening hard drive to strangers is the
danger claim.

Suppose somebody installs limewire.. Their hard drive has in your words
been opened up to strangers. What is a stranger now going to do?
I haven't searched in obscure places, but I haven't heard that
limewire has been exploited or that is has been exploited by
mistakenly offering access to parts of their hard drive that they
didn't mean to. (If that has happened, it is very very unusual , and
not the risk people mean regarding using limewire). Limewire offers
strangers read access to a directory on the hard drive for limewire
downloads. One would have to be following instructions on how to be a
wolly, in order to share all their personal files, putting them in that
directory. TI's not the defaults. And, i've never heard of anybody
doing that.. That is never the danger of limewire. THe danger is the
user downloading and running malicious stuff.

The danger with limewire is not inherent, and - if anything - - in
terms of accessing hard drives - it is actually based on strangers
"opening up their hard drives" to you!!!!!! So it's toally the
opposite of what you say..
you are writing in an untechnical way, and backwards.. I think if you
wrote in a technical way, then you might not make that mistake and you
might get it forwards.


I'm sure your posts are usually very useful and helpful,, and cotnain
good information. But, once you get less technical , things get
questionable.

Of course, this is a windows xp newsgroup, that is your expertise. And
you were answering a question about security.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

you seriously oversnipped.

No, I snipped nothing from your last post.

This one, with it's diigressions, yes.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

 

[Leythos]

A person using limewire may also be reasonably safe. If he doesn't
download and run anything malicious. Adn if he does, he can learn not
to - if he is willing. I still wouldn't say he shouldn't use limewire.
Maybe he wants to download his music as much as he wants to browse the
web.

Browsing on Google's servers or HP Servers or Microsofts servers, is not
anything like searching for music and looking at it using Limewire.
Content on web servers is generally virus/malware checked, there is no
such expectation for P2P files.

Browsing the web is nothing close to browsing using P2P file sharing
software.

 

[q_q_anonymous]

Browsing on Google's servers or HP Servers or Microsofts servers, is not
anything like searching for music and looking at it using Limewire.
Content on web servers is generally virus/malware checked, there is no
such expectation for P2P files.

Browsing the web is nothing close to browsing using P2P file sharing
software.

I wasn't comparing the two.

I wasn't even comparing a web server to the server set up by a PTP app.
infact, in your snip I didn't say 'web server'.

I was answering a guy that argued that limewire is dangerous because it
opens your hdd to strangers.

Of course, Google open their computesr to strangers . I'm saying
google don't have problems. (I wasn't referring to user problems from
using google)

Of course there are differecnes between Google (who hire techies that
nkow the threats). And an ignorant user.

We know, the danger is user error. But he was saying something silly
which could be refuted with the google example

The user was infact correct in questioning what she had heard - that
limewire was inherently unsafe.. Which was misinformation. and should
have been corrected and not confirmed. I think we had a similar
discussion ;-)

 

[q_q_anonymous]

No, I snipped nothing from your last post.

<snip>
I agree you snipped nothing that I wrote from my post - not a letter.

But You oversnipped an important part of my post. The part where I
quoted you, to respond to you!!

I was answering your argument and you snipped your argument out of my
post!

I'll remind you what you wrote

"> LimeWire, like most other peer-to-peer file sharing programs, is
a

 

[Leythos]

I was answering a guy that argued that limewire is dangerous because it
opens your hdd to strangers.

I hate to say this, as you won't agree, but it is dangerous.

While nuke material is safe when properly handled and with
understanding, letting it get into the hands of the nontechnical is
dangerous. So, I would tell people that nuke material is always
dangerous, and I would not condition it to say "in the hands of non-
technical people", in fact, it's always dangerous, as is limewire, but
that doesn't mean that people using it can't control it - which does not
change the threat/danger.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

<snip>
I agree you snipped nothing that I wrote from my post - not a letter.

But You oversnipped an important part of my post. The part where I
quoted you, to respond to you!!

Well, certainly! I was responding to you, not to an earlier post of my
own. That's the way it's normally done. (Hint: I already know what I'd
posted earlier - didn't need to remind myself.)


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

 

[q_q_anonymous]

I hate to say this, as you won't agree, but it is dangerous.

While nuke material is safe when properly handled and with
understanding, letting it get into the hands of the nontechnical is
dangerous. So, I would tell people that nuke material is always
dangerous, and I would not condition it to say "in the hands of non-
technical people", in fact, it's always dangerous, as is limewire, but
that doesn't mean that people using it can't control it - which does not
change the threat/danger.

--

I could agree with that. If we were all consistent with our semantics.
But the same is true of Windows. The same is true of a web browser.
The same is true of google's web servers. It is only when administered
by tehnical people that they can be reasonably safe. Yet people don't
typilcally say that Windows is dangerous. And with web browsers,
people don't just say it's dangerous to use wrongly, they say ways of
using them safely.

Less importantly - there is another distinction. He and everybody else
in the world don't usually say that Web browsers are dangerous either,
only the use of may be. Limewire - like a web browser, isn't really
"administered". It's just used safely or unsafely or not used at all.
Though that distniction is not significant..

more importantly-
he got it the wrong way around.. because the main risk with limewire is
the user accessing the hard drives of strangers. Not that strangers can
access your hard drive. (the latter being rather scary if that was the
danger!)

And the language that he used he wouldn't use for web browsers or the
rest..
He said
" LimeWire, like most other peer-to-peer file sharing programs, is a

wide-open gap in your computer's security, and an almost guaranteed
source of malware (not from LimeWire. itself, so much, but from giving

thousands of other people -- not all of whom are well-intended --
access to your hard drive.) "

beside the obvious nontechnical FUD language..
If what he said was true, then merely installing limewire is the
danger. The prboelm to him, is not using it. But having it installed
can even be a danger - to him, and then anybody can access your hard
drive..
This is totally insane.. They access a specific directory. And this is
not the danger people refer to with limewire..
In a computer disucssion group, it's important to be technically
correct. And certainly important not to be technically wrong.

analysing further,
It is as if he he is telling the user soemthing that'll stop the user
using limewire. Because if he told the user the real reason, that user
may think "oh, I can use it , I know what i'm doing", and he'll go
ahead and mess it up. And then - Bruce thinks - the user will regret
using it. Or, Bruce or others will have to help him. It's really
implicitly patronizing the guy by lying about technical issues. That's
breaking moral rules, and it's breaking convention for a computer
discussion group - to be technically true and not technically wrong.

 

[q_q_anonymous]

Well, certainly! I was responding to you, not to an earlier post of my
own. That's the way it's normally done. (Hint: I already know what I'd
posted earlier - didn't need to remind myself.)

It's part of the flow of the discussion.
And there are 2 good reasons why when people quote discussions, they
don't remove everything they've said.

Anyhow, to counter your madness another way,

if you don't think about me or anybody else by snipping what you
wrote..

Why don't you apply that rule to yourself.

Why don't you write your reply, then snip everything I wrote. Quote
nothing. Because you don't need it anymore. And I don't need it .
Because as you would say - and this could apply to everybody. " I
already know what I'd posted earlier " no need to "remind myself"
So if you want to reply to somebody, by your reasoning , don't quote
them either once you've posted!

 

[Leythos]

Less importantly - there is another distinction. He and everybody else
in the world don't usually say that Web browsers are dangerous either,
only the use of may be. Limewire - like a web browser, isn't really
"administered". It's just used safely or unsafely or not used at all.
Though that distniction is not significant..

Actually, I think that IE is dangerous and I normally disable it or make
it so that users don't use it, so I guess that it kind of bursts that
path.

You can not put Limewire in the same boat as any other non-P2P solution.

Websites are administered by technical types (most all of them),
limewire sources are not administered by technical types (most all of
them). IE, as a browser, is dangerous in the default, as it directly
permits exposure to malware and exploits if a user happens to get media
(and by media I mean Music, Video, Files, etc...) from unadministrated
sites (and you know what I mean by this). Limewire allows users to
generally search the web for systems that contain the target media, and
we're not just talking MP3 files, that could be any type of file
pretending to be any other type of file, and since those machines are
generally unadministered by technical types that would generally make
them malware free as a standard, you really have no idea what you are
getting.

Generally speaking, if I download Photoshop from adobe.com I'm safe and
it's 99.9% likely that it's a good download (not that they really permit
that). If I use limewire to download Photoshop, there is a good bet that
it's not a legit download (Ha) and that it could easily contain malware
if not malware itself (pretending to be PS installer).

Another thing to consider - I can block content types in my firewall, so
that users can't download MP3 files or other file types, and still
browse the web.... If I allow Limewire ports access, I can not block
content types from users - and this means that it's a much larger threat
than a web browser.

The simple fact is that P2P apps are a threat because of what they
expose users too, not the app itself, although there have been many
cases where limewire installs malware as part of the package (as you use
to be able to brand limewire). Don't come back and say they can be
expose with some other app, it's just not anywhere near the same level
of exposure.

 

[q_q_anonymous]

Actually, I think that IE is dangerous and I normally disable it or make
it so that users don't use it, so I guess that it kind of bursts that
path.

funnily enough, me saying that my distinction of saying a server app is
administered wheres a client app is merely used (at least on a home
system without a network firewall blocking content). That meant I agree
as to the danger of client apps used without care..

You do say Microsoft Internet Explorer is Potentially Dangerous. And
you add the argument that this is because of the degree of unsafeness..
I agree with you, infact, I think that internet explorer requires far
more skill to use safely, than limewire does, if you are an
adventurous user of a web browser.

Though I don't see Bruce Chambers criticising IE like he talked of
limewire,

So, However.. I think although we agree.. and I can accept your
semantics, as you elaborated on them. I don't see Bruce Chambers saying
anything near as sensible as you have.

As far as Bruce chambers is concerned.. He still has his claims, that
Limewire leaves your computer " wide open" as if the just having it
installed puts somebody at risk, even if they don't use it.
As far as he is concerned, it is strangers accessing your hard drive
that is the danger.

And I don't see him - as you have - criticising Microsoft Iinternet
Explorer as dangerous, or if he were to be more accurate, Not
Inherently Dangerous. But potentially dangerous / dangerous if used
adventurously and without skill.

Your position seems to be the same as mine here. Just that you didn't
think it was so important to make clear from the start that it was
potential danger rather than inherent danger. But that distinction that
I amde from the start, you agree with. Bruce has made some claims in
non technical language that really only point towards an inherent
danger, and the wrong inherent danger. limewire running lets people
access your hard drive. Your comments which you have explained, were
never absurd like that.. even in their original form. It was just an
issue of the ambiguity when you said danger meaning potential danger.

I don't think your situation is that of Bruce Chambers. Bruce chambers
just made a few absurd statements and hasn't said a word since to my
arguments against him.
Whereas we agere.

I would add that limewire is more **potentially dangerous** than IE
is.
Many use limewire just for downloading music. Which is fairly safe. I
think even video clips are fairly safe.

here we differ-
Only once you download applications with it and run them, then limewire
becomes very high risk. I understand that somebody administering a
network with users with their own agendas that don't care so much about
the computers 'cos it's not their computers. And you can't block
content . And it's a business environment. For any of those reasons, I
understand that you would not limewire on the systems.
But an individual user, responsible for his computer, may just have
limewire and download songs. He doesn't need to be a technical wiz to
understand not to download and run apps. that It requires complete
technical stupidity to try to download a song, and then download an
application by mistake. Limewire does have a drop down menu that lets
you hoose "application", "audio", so that's clear to a non technical
person..
Limewire is still potentially dangerous.. I'd put it below IE though in
potential danger.(this is for a home system. I guess if administering a
large network in a business, limewire may be worse than IE because you
can't block content. Or perhaps not. Either way both are very
dangerous in a large network environment of a company! WHereas a home
user may be trusted to reasonably use limewire responsibly on his own
computer which he cares for- if he just downloads songs and vid clips)

Also, consider that windows has internet explorer installed by default,
and the technical skill it takes for an adventurous user of IE to use
it safely, skill that is typically lacking.
But without IE , I don't think windows with no other 3rd party
software is that potentially dangerous by default. Of course, windows
is a bit of a necessity.. moreso than limewire!

I have read the rest of your post, I wrote this response after reading
the whole thing.. I just put it under this first paragraph you wrote,
because it's close to the one you were responding to, and your first
paragraph summarises your argument. I've taken into accoutn the
specicfics you mentioned in later paragraphs.

<snip>

 

[Plato]

ive been told that it is unsafe to use limewire as it has malware and spyware
encoroporated is this program safe to use please?

What types of totally brand new trojans with no way to remove them are
you interested in acquiring?

 

[Leythos]

What types of totally brand new trojans with no way to remove them are
you interested in acquiring?

LOL, come on, everyone knows that limewire only allows you to download
clean, protected, non-infected files