How can I kill IE?!?!?!!?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
"If you think any of MS tools like the lame "firewall" will keep you
safe or even close to safe, you're pretty naive."

Not really! I did not say they were the best tools but surely they are
better than none. Our present problems are because so many internet
users have no protection so any infestation spreads rapidly creating
vast volumes of "shit" going in every direction.

It is not monopolistic to provide "free" software. It is monopolistic to
provide software, which prevents users employing alternatives. Thus
providing Internet Explorer is not of itself monopolistic but it would
be if users were thereby prevented from using an alternative browser.
The case against Microsoft was not revealing sufficient operating system
information to enable others to write competing software and they were
forced to do so.

That is not to deny that the market penetration by Microsoft is so
great that it does have a virtual monopoly in some areas, which is
against the interests of the consumer.


~~~~~~

Regards.

Gerry

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FCA

Stourport, Worcs, England
Enquire, plan and execute.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Apparently, _Alias_, on 01/28/2005 03:53 PM,typed:
I see it as MS monopolizing again like they did with IE over Netscape. If
you think any of MS tools like the lame "firewall" will keep you safe or
even close to safe, you're pretty naive.
Click to expand...

That firewall, IIRC, controls only the incoming traffic and not the
outgoing. So it does not offer general protection. One is way better off
using an alternative, even the free version of Zone Alarm is quite nice.

Sam.
 
Apparently, _Dan_, on 01/28/2005 03:53 PM,typed:
I agree with you completely Sam that the program and all asscociated registry
entries should be deleted upon the removal of the program. Unfortunately,
this is not the case and you have to go into the registry to manually remove
entries and if you remove something that you should not then there goes your
system. I have heard of a program called Total Unistall that is supposed to
work quite well but I have not tried it. Has anyone used this program or
know of something that can totally remove a program as well as all associated
registry entries from that program without harming the registry or/and
underlying operating system?
Click to expand...

Even a program that saves the registry entries that are being introduced
or modified during the installation of a program into a text file would
be quite nice.

That list can be later manually checked and the corresponding
registeries removed if they misbehave upon uninstallation of their
parent program.

Sam.
 
I hope that Microsoft or the open source community will bring such an
unistaller to the marketplace.

: Apparently, _Dan_, on 01/28/2005 03:53 PM,typed:
: > I agree with you completely Sam that the program and all asscociated
registry
: > entries should be deleted upon the removal of the program.
Unfortunately,
: > this is not the case and you have to go into the registry to manually
remove
: > entries and if you remove something that you should not then there goes
your
: > system. I have heard of a program called Total Unistall that is supposed
to
: > work quite well but I have not tried it. Has anyone used this program or
: > know of something that can totally remove a program as well as all
associated
: > registry entries from that program without harming the registry or/and
: > underlying operating system?
: >
:
: Even a program that saves the registry entries that are being introduced
: or modified during the installation of a program into a text file would
: be quite nice.
:
: That list can be later manually checked and the corresponding
: registeries removed if they misbehave upon uninstallation of their
: parent program.
:
: Sam.
:
:
: --
: (Remove all underscores,if any, from my email address to get the correct
: one. Apologies for the inconvenience but this is to reduce spam.)
:
 
Hi, Dan.
Since I am not an MVP I do not
have the same restrictions and utter loyalty towards Microsoft products.
Click to expand...

We can't let this line pass without correction!

MVPs are some of Microsoft's strongest critics. If you read these
newsgroups very much, you'll see many occasions when MVPs "tell it like it
is", and MS and their products come in for a fair share of criticism and
blame. But MS-bashing has become so popular that the company and its people
and products often are the target of unjustified flames. Anybody, MVP or
not, who tries to restore some balance in that situation is likely to be
accused of excessive loyalty to MS. Few of us would have accepted the MVP
award if there were the restrictions you allege.

As we keep reminding MS, MVPs don't work for Microsoft. Our prime loyalty
is not to Microsoft. Our loyalty is to computer users, most of whom use
Microsoft products, especially Windows.

In just this single thread, you will find MVPs who are using Firefox, so
that alone belies the "utter loyalty" that you suggested. I don't use
Firefox or Mozilla (yet) or Netscape (since about 1996), but I use Quicken,
not Microsoft Money. I have MS Digital Image, but I use Adobe Photoshop
Elements. "Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera..." (To quote the King of
Siam.)

I now return you to the "kill IE?" thread, in progress...

RC
 
Some people are far better off with the Windows Firewall than any 3rd party
firewall.
The Windows Firewall is simple an efficient at controlling what comes in.
3rd party firewalls will require configurations as things are changed while
for the most part the Windows Firewall does not.
It is those changes that would encourage many to disable the firewall rather
than keep up with it.
Also if you are in control of what is in the computer, there is nothing to
control going out.
If you have an issue with something going out, you have already failed in
protecting your computer.
Maintaining the computer will eliminate these problems as they appear.
The Windows Firewall can help keep a computer safe without another firewall.
 
Sorry for the mistake and I appreciate the correction, RC. I for one am glad
Microsoft has supported the products that it has and given such a long
lifeline to the 9x code which includes 98FE, 98SE and ME. As you may know, I
dual-boot with 98SE and XP PRO and I am considering adding Linux to the list
and having a tri-boot computer. I also am interested in the new mini Apple
computer and may save up and buy one someday but I certainly do not like the
annoying, imo, one-button mice that Apple uses. I took my observation from
the fact that a majority of MVP's sometimes seem to be loyal to Microsoft no
matter what. I now see this is not the case and again I appreciate the MVP's
that help all of us here understand Microsoft products a little better.

: Hi, Dan.
:
: > Since I am not an MVP I do not
: > have the same restrictions and utter loyalty towards Microsoft products.
:
: We can't let this line pass without correction!
:
: MVPs are some of Microsoft's strongest critics. If you read these
: newsgroups very much, you'll see many occasions when MVPs "tell it like it
: is", and MS and their products come in for a fair share of criticism and
: blame. But MS-bashing has become so popular that the company and its
people
: and products often are the target of unjustified flames. Anybody, MVP or
: not, who tries to restore some balance in that situation is likely to be
: accused of excessive loyalty to MS. Few of us would have accepted the MVP
: award if there were the restrictions you allege.
:
: As we keep reminding MS, MVPs don't work for Microsoft. Our prime loyalty
: is not to Microsoft. Our loyalty is to computer users, most of whom use
: Microsoft products, especially Windows.
:
: In just this single thread, you will find MVPs who are using Firefox, so
: that alone belies the "utter loyalty" that you suggested. I don't use
: Firefox or Mozilla (yet) or Netscape (since about 1996), but I use Quicken,
: not Microsoft Money. I have MS Digital Image, but I use Adobe Photoshop
: Elements. "Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera..." (To quote the King of
: Siam.)
:
: I now return you to the "kill IE?" thread, in progress...
:
: RC
: --
: R. C. White, CPA
: San Marcos, TX
: (e-mail address removed)
: Microsoft Windows MVP
:
: : >I agree with you Galen that Mozilla Firefox is awesome. I like it much
: > better than IE and its tab-browsing is very useful. It does not suffer
: > the
: > same vulnerabilities of IE due to its lack of ActiveX support which is a
: > Microsoft technology that hackers have taken advantage of to the utmost.
: > AFAIK, you cannot remove IE but you can mimize its use by only using it
: > when
: > visiting Windows Update Site and a few other sites that support Active X.
: > In
: > the meantime you need to protect yourself. I recently upgraded my D-Link
: > router that hackers were bypassing too much to my second defense of ZA
PRO
: > fully updated via my 98SE system. In my XP PRO. system I use the
hardware
: > firewall which is now a fancy $80 Link-Ssy router as well as Microsoft's
: > software firewall that they provide. I have done beta-testing for
: > Microsoft
: > in the past and need fairly good defenses on my computer now. I use
: > SpywareBlaster which is excellent in stopping baddies (everything bad aka
: > tracking cookies, CWS, attempted hijack redirections, etc.), also the
paid
: > version of SpySweeper by Webroot which is also very good, in addition to
: > Adaware, in addition to Spybot -- Search and Destroy, an addition to
: > AntiVir
: > which I plan on updating to E-Trust's antivirus/firewall program and take
: > advantage of the special deal until 31 Jan. 2005. I also have other
: > defensives but you get the idea. I have a Falcon-Northwest computer that
: > I
: > bought back in 99 and it had the original 98 Windows on it and I remember
: > spending $20 to buy the update cd. Since then, I have purchased a full
: > retail CD of 98SE and a full retail CD of XP PRO. I hope this helps you
: > and
: > others users some and feel free to comment. Since I am not an MVP I do
: > not
: > have the same restrictions and utter loyalty towards Microsoft products.
: > IMO, Microsoft is great and has been very helpful to me via regular mail,
: > e-mail and telephone support. However, as an individual I cannot limit
: > myself to one operating system and that is why I dual-boot with 98SE and
: > XP
: > PRO. and I plan to soon look into trying to tri-boot with 98SE, XP PRO
and
: > Linux. Also, after I have saved some money, then I may purchase the new
: > MINI-MAC that looks really cool, does not have the same problems
regarding
: > spyware and viruses that Microsoft products have. All right, I have said
: > enough and I yield the floor to the next person. (LOL!!)
: >
: > : > : Now that I've switched to Mozilla Firefox (which I highly recommend), I
: > want
: > : to completely remove MIE from my system due to security issues; popups
: > are
: > : still sneaking through via IE.... and microsoft anti-spyware hasn't
: > helped
: > : either. But, when I went to uninstall IE, it only removed the links to
: > the
: > : software.... IE still very much exists on my computer and the popups
are
: > : still taking full advantage......
: > :
: > : any ideas?
:
 
Jupiter, I think there are cases of people using numerous firewalls. I think
Gary Terhune, MVP Shell/User uses a hardware firewall as well as the Windows
Firewall and then a third party firewall as well to help keep his computer
safe. I know having two or more software firewalls is generally not
suggested but I think it is okay in his case because he is an expert. This
is the only time that I have heard this being done and since he is an expert
I am sure he knows how to configure his firewalls.

: Some people are far better off with the Windows Firewall than any 3rd party
: firewall.
: The Windows Firewall is simple an efficient at controlling what comes in.
: 3rd party firewalls will require configurations as things are changed while
: for the most part the Windows Firewall does not.
: It is those changes that would encourage many to disable the firewall
rather
: than keep up with it.
: Also if you are in control of what is in the computer, there is nothing to
: control going out.
: If you have an issue with something going out, you have already failed in
: protecting your computer.
: Maintaining the computer will eliminate these problems as they appear.
: The Windows Firewall can help keep a computer safe without another
firewall.
:
: --
: Jupiter Jones [MVP]
: http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
:
:
: : > That firewall, IIRC, controls only the incoming traffic and not the
: > outgoing. So it does not offer general protection. One is way better off
: > using an alternative, even the free version of Zone Alarm is quite nice.
: >
: > Sam.
: >
: > --
: > (Remove all underscores,if any, from my email address to get the correct
: > one. Apologies for the inconvenience but this is to reduce spam.)
:
:
 
Sam said:
Even a program that saves the registry entries that are being introduced
or modified during the installation of a program into a text file would
be quite nice.

That list can be later manually checked and the corresponding
registeries removed if they misbehave upon uninstallation of their
parent program.
Click to expand...
Hi

A freeware tool that you might want to take a look at:

Total Uninstall - track and undo system changes
http://www.snapfiles.com/get/totaluninstall.html
 
Apparently, _Jupiter Jones [MVP]_, on 01/28/2005 05:05 PM,typed:
Some people are far better off with the Windows Firewall than any 3rd party
firewall.
The Windows Firewall is simple an efficient at controlling what comes in.
3rd party firewalls will require configurations as things are changed while
for the most part the Windows Firewall does not.
It is those changes that would encourage many to disable the firewall rather
than keep up with it.
Also if you are in control of what is in the computer, there is nothing to
control going out.
If you have an issue with something going out, you have already failed in
protecting your computer.
Click to expand...

That failure may not been intentional, but it is a breach of security
nevertheless. But there are ample reasons to have control over outgoing
traffic as well (a networking security specialist would love to explain
this to you). Example, supposed some malware gets installed on my
computer from a compromised site while I am use IE and that malware
starts trying to 'phone home'. Windows firewall will happily allow it, a
better firewall will tell me about it and ask what to do. ZoneAlarm does
just that. Second example, you may want to block outgoing access to some
websites for all users from a home network/computer. Third example, you
may just wish not let any programs talk to the internet at all!

You seem to be trying to prove that securing outgoing connections is
useless.

Maintaining the computer will eliminate these problems as they appear.
The Windows Firewall can help keep a computer safe without another firewall.
Click to expand...

It can help, but very little.

Sam.
 
"You seem to be trying to prove that securing outgoing connections is
useless."
I never suggested that.
However with the configurations necessary with a full featured firewall,
many users will simply give up and disable the whole thing.

As for the malware you suggest, maintenance will take care of almost all if
not all of it.

Before you can convince me a full featured firewall is the best for EVERYONE
you also need to ensure it is at least as simple as the Windows Firewall.
Anything more complicated WILL be disabled as to complex by some.
 
Carey said:
Internet Explorer is a core component of Windows XP and
is not designed to be removed. If you attempt to remove
it, your system will become unstable and you'll end up
possibly reinstalling Windows XP from scratch.

Also, Internet Explorer is the only browser you can use
to download updates from the Windows Update web site.

I tried Firefox for several weeks...I was not impressed with
it and it is now removed from my system.
Click to expand...

Yet another reason to use Firefox.
 
Every "install" tracking program I've tried was disappointing to start with
or eventually fell over and let me down ! Many "installs" will often not
tolerate other software sniffing around in the background. ...which is why
many software houses advise people to switch off anti-virus software before
installing - ....similar sort of situation I suppose.

A couple of years ago, after a lot of thought, I eventually got a
"home-made" method into place on my PC. Part of that is strategic use of
MS's backup program - and it's "system state" option. This is the only way
I've found to reliably backup and restore XP's registry. Of course, you
have to keep track of application software installed after backing up a
system state, (bear in mind that creating a restore point does not back up
the XP system registry). They may need uninstalling before restoring the
system state - then reinstalling. It's a hideous procedure really - and
very manual.

I played with Norton Ghost 9.0 for a while in the past, and even that's a
bit manual - ghosting drives to drives - very boring and rapidly out of date
after you've done it ! ...A while ago I looked at RAID, and after reading
the specs. came to the conclusion that RAID types 0 and 1 didn't really
offer very much in the form of "disaster recovery". RAID 5 looked lovely
but, I don't really want to spend all that much on hardware :-)
....mumble...mumble....

regards, Richard
 
Ray

What reason is that? I do not follow what you are saying as Carey did
not suggests any reasons why Firefox should be used!

--

~~~~~~

Regards.

Gerry

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FCA

Stourport, Worcs, England
Enquire, plan and execute.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Countless times where I've had to sit with people and drag them through
basic use of their IE browser and firewall. (...and that includes FORCING
them to use Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V "copy and paste. i.e to get a web address
into the trusted sites zone of IE, and if using Symantec Internet Security
software, slapping the same domain name into Norton's "web list," ....then
clearing TIF and reloading that site!).! :-) ...etc.

It seems to me that most peoples' problems with IE stem from not even having
a simple mental picture of what's happening while using the damned thing !
.....and for YEARS, some of them not even knowing that Security Zones even
EXIST in IE , or what they're for / what they do, and how to make use of
them.

It only take a few seconds to "tweak" IE and maybe tweak the firewall as
well, after having made the effort to found out where a few things are
located in it.

Then there's all those times that they clicked "allow" when they really
should have clicked "deny" ..or block ! :-)

....how many times have people in here sat down beside a "novice" and quietly
thought to oneself, "..where do I start" ...(this is going to take HOURS
.....I want to go home ...this person needs SO much time spent with them ! ?

regards, Richard


Jupiter Jones said:
"You seem to be trying to prove that securing outgoing connections is
useless."
I never suggested that.
However with the configurations necessary with a full featured firewall,
many users will simply give up and disable the whole thing.

As for the malware you suggest, maintenance will take care of almost all
if not all of it.

Before you can convince me a full featured firewall is the best for
EVERYONE you also need to ensure it is at least as simple as the Windows
Firewall.
Anything more complicated WILL be disabled as to complex by some.
Click to expand...
 
I thought that people went to Mozilla and Firefox etc. software because they
had never found their way to the "Security Zones" in IE's "Internet
Options," and also didn't realise that at elast a little "user
intervention" was
required both by IE and ones firewall :-)
<grin>

regards, Richard
 
Richard

I appreciate the point you make. I did read what you said in more detail
earlier.



~~~~~~

Regards.

Gerry

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FCA

Stourport, Worcs, England
Enquire, plan and execute.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Galen said:
Now that I've switched to Mozilla Firefox (which I highly recommend), I want
to completely remove MIE from my system due to security issues; popups are
still sneaking through via IE.... and microsoft anti-spyware hasn't helped
either. But, when I went to uninstall IE, it only removed the links to the
software.... IE still very much exists on my computer and the popups are
still taking full advantage......

any ideas?
Click to expand...


Be design, IE *cannot* be removed from the operating system. But you
certainly don't have to use it, if you don't want to. Anyway, removing
IE wouldn't really solve the real problem: a poorly secured computer; it
would only hide the symptoms.

To deal with issues caused by any sort of "adware" and/or
"spyware,"such as Gator, Comet Cursors, Smiley Central, Xupiter,
Bonzai Buddy, or KaZaA, and their remnants, that you've deliberately
(but without understanding the consequences) installed, two products
that are quite effective (at finding and removing this type of
scumware) are Ad-Aware from www.lavasoft.de and SpyBot Search &
Destroy from www.safer-networking.org/. Both have free versions.
It's even possible to use SpyBot Search & Destroy to "immunize" your
system against most future intrusions. I use both and generally
perform manual scans every week or so to clean out cookies, etc.

Additionally, manual removal instructions for the most common
varieties of scumware are available here:

PC Hell Spyware and Adware Removal Help
http://www.pchell.com/support/spyware.shtml


Neither adware nor spyware, collectively known as scumware,
magically install themselves on anyone's computer. They are almost
always deliberately installed by the computer's user, as part of some
allegedly "free" service or product.

While there are some unscrupulous malware distributors out there,
who do attempt to install and exploit malware without consent, the
majority of them simply rely upon the intellectual laziness and
gullibility of the average consumer, counting on them to quickly click
past the EULA in his/her haste to get the latest in "free" cutesy
cursors, screensavers, "utilities," and/or wallpapers.

If you were to read the EULAs that accompany, and to which the
computer user must agree before the download/installation of the
"screensaver" continues, most adware and spyware, you'll find that
they _do_ have the consumer's permission to do exactly what they're
doing. In the overwhelming majority of cases, computer users have no
one to blame but themselves.

There are several essential components to computer security: a
knowledgeable and pro-active user, a properly configured firewall,
reliable and up-to-date antivirus software, and the prompt repair (via
patches, hotfixes, or service packs) of any known vulnerabilities.

The weakest link in this "equation" is, of course, the computer
user. No software manufacturer can -- nor should they be expected
to -- protect the computer user from him/herself. All too many people
have bought into the various PC/software manufacturers marketing
claims of easy computing. They believe that their computer should be
no harder to use than a toaster oven; they have neither the
inclination or desire to learn how to safely use their computer. All
too few people keep their antivirus software current, install patches
in a timely manner, or stop to really think about that cutesy link
they're about to click.

Firewalls and anti-virus applications, which should always be used
and should always be running, are important components of "safe hex,"
but they cannot, and should not be expected to, protect the computer
user from him/herself. Ultimately, it is incumbent upon each and
every computer user to learn how to secure his/her own computer.


To learn more about practicing "safe hex," start with these links:

Protect Your PC
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/default.asp

Home Computer Security
http://www.cert.org/homeusers/HomeComputerSecurity/

List of Antivirus Software Vendors
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;49500

Home PC Firewall Guide
http://www.firewallguide.com/

Scumware.com
http://www.scumware.com/

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH
 
Jupiter said:
"You seem to be trying to prove that securing outgoing connections is
useless."
I never suggested that.
Click to expand...

That is why I wrote "You seem ...."
However with the configurations necessary with a full featured firewall,
many users will simply give up and disable the whole thing.

As for the malware you suggest, maintenance will take care of almost all if
not all of it.
Click to expand...

Exception: zero day attacks.

Before you can convince me a full featured firewall is the best for EVERYONE
you also need to ensure it is at least as simple as the Windows Firewall.
Click to expand...

So we are forsaking security for convenience's sake. BTW, to make a fare
comparison, you should look at ease of use of products with same
features. Windows firewall is lacking half of them.

Anything more complicated WILL be disabled as to complex by some.
Click to expand...

Even if a person just uses IE, s/he still has to become at least some
computer literate. Becoming familiar with security zones in IE, knowing
what to allow or deny, knowing what is a status bar, etc. is a must if
Windows has to become more secure. If a typical user is able to learn
even these basics, intalling and using ZoneAlarm is not more difficult
at all.

I have been telling people who ask for help in cleaning their PCs that
they *have* to abandon some convenience to gain more security. In
pursuit of making things easy for people MS has made Windows insecure.
MS has eventually admitted it and started go give out updates which make
Windows more secure but which also take away some convenience from the
users. Users must become more aware. Users must become more computer
literate ("IE is *not* 'the internet'"). With this education with them,
using a typical application based firewall is not hard at all. And if
this basic education is lacking, Windows firewall is not going to be of
much help anyway.

Corollary: Windows is quite secure but lack of education among users is
it's downfall.

Sam.
 
Really now RJK, Firefox is a good alternative browser and because it does not
have the market share that Microsoft has thus making it a less likely target,
does not have Active X and doesn't have hackers that are ticked at Mozilla
like they are ticked at Microsoft for some reason and so these points make
Mozilla Firefox a decent alternative browser. Your post seems mostly
worthless to me.

: I thought that people went to Mozilla and Firefox etc. software because
they
: had never found their way to the "Security Zones" in IE's "Internet
: Options," and also didn't realise that at elast a little "user
: intervention" was
: required both by IE and ones firewall :-)
: <grin>
:
: regards, Richard
:
:
: : > Ray
: >
: > What reason is that? I do not follow what you are saying as Carey did not
: > suggests any reasons why Firefox should be used!
: >
: > --
: >
: > ~~~~~~
: >
: > Regards.
: >
: > Gerry
: >
: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > FCA
: >
: > Stourport, Worcs, England
: > Enquire, plan and execute.
: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: >
: >
: > : >> Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
: >>> Internet Explorer is a core component of Windows XP and
: >>> is not designed to be removed. If you attempt to remove
: >>> it, your system will become unstable and you'll end up
: >>> possibly reinstalling Windows XP from scratch.
: >>>
: >>> Also, Internet Explorer is the only browser you can use
: >>> to download updates from the Windows Update web site.
: >>>
: >>> I tried Firefox for several weeks...I was not impressed with
: >>> it and it is now removed from my system.
: >>>
: >>
: >> Yet another reason to use Firefox.
: >
:
:
 
Back
Top