P
Paul Montgomery
Flight said:
Mark was/is not in this NG. Mark will never see it.
Mark was/is not in this NG. Mark will never see it.
P
Paul Montgomery
Flight said:
That fact the with IE one can easily attack the user with an ActiveX
control is a known fact. The fact that WM can be attack by and ActiveX
control is a known fact. It's a known fact that MS solutions are
targeted more than any solutions is a know fact. It's also a known fact
the MS O/S is used by more users that will click away and get
compromised is a known fact.
F
Flight
You can disable ActiveX if you don't trust it. So what's the problem then?Paul Montgomery said:
And did you ever hear about Apple's Safari? Did you hear about the cracks of
the servers from Red Hat and Fedora? Linux could not be attacked they said.
But you know what? You can send a letter, written on paper. I assure you
that you will not get any virus. Maybe the flue.
M
Mick Murphy
Read the OP's question.
They came here for some sensible advice.
The majority of people that post(except in vista.general) give decent answers.
Then SCUM like you, mopngomery, decides to post in this Newsgroup.
Go away, little man!
You are a disgrace.
They came here for some sensible advice.
The majority of people that post(except in vista.general) give decent answers.
Then SCUM like you, mopngomery, decides to post in this Newsgroup.
Go away, little man!
You are a disgrace.
P
Paul Montgomery
The "Paul Montgomery" you replied to is NOT the Paul Montgomery you
love to hate (me) but someone who has the maturity of a teenager who
gets his rocks off using my name and email address to post here.
HIS IP - 4.224.xxx.xxx or 4.225.xxx.xxx - traces to anywhere between
Dayton and Cincinnati Ohio: he has a dialup account with level3.com.
He hasn't done that with his Earthlink account just yer. I'm waiting.
MINE - 67.173.179.177 - traces to Chicago, IL and never changes: I
have cable broadband with Comcast.
Do I need to teach you how to check message headers now?
P
Paul Montgomery
BTW... it's patently obvious that you never even read the reply by my
imposter. He isn't a beginner and his advice here is usually spot on
and is definitely more detailed than your replies.
You've never had any problem with "Mr. Arnold" replies, right? That's
the moniker he uses here most the time. Here's the complete list from
his past two weeks online:
Paul Montgomery (me, your best buddy)
Mr. Arnold
The Bee (his newest)
Anti on Chicken Little(s)
Junk Yard Dog
Little Mad Dog
The Lone Ranger
The Lone Ranger1
The Lone Ranger2
Paul Montgomery 9000
General Paul Montgomery
General Paul Montgomery1
General Paul Montgomery2
General Paul Montgomery3
General Paul Montgomery4
General Paul Montgomery5
General Paul Montgomery6
General Paul Montgomery7
B
Bruce Chambers
If you'd care to actually read my post, you'll see that I told the OP
that Vista' firewall was perfectly adequate for their purposes. I
didn't recommend *any* 3rd party firewall, much less ZoneAlarm.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
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
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
B
Bruce Chambers
Kayman said:
I'm not going to argue your point of view, as such, although I don't
necessarily agree with it, but I would like to point out that referring
to Steve Gibson as any sort of security "expert" is, at best, a sick joke.
Gibson has been fooling a lot of people for several years, now, so
don't feel too bad about having believed him. He mixes just enough
facts in with his hysteria and hyperbole to be plausible. Despicably,
Gibson is assuming a presumably morally superior pose as a White Knight
out to rescue the poor, defenseless computer user, all the while
offering solutions that do no good whatsoever.
Perhaps you should read what real computer security specialists
have to say about Steve Gibson's "security" expertise. You can start here:
http://www.grcsucks.com/
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
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
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
P
Paul Montgomery
Got a better site?
B
Bruce Chambers
Paul said:
Sorry, no. Gibson had been so thoroughly discredited do many years
ago, that I failed to notice that that the web site had lapsed.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
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
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
P
Paul Montgomery
Wikipedia has a synopsis that looks pretty damning:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Gibson
Click on "computer programmer" then on "controversy"
B
Bruce Chambers
Paul said:
That pretty much sums him up, yes. It's kind of a shame, in a way, as
his SpinRite was actually a useful tool. It's too bad that he wondered
off at a tangent, so to speak.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
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
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
P
Paul Montgomery
Spinrite! THAT brings back memories! Haven't used that since Win98
days. Maybe not since Win95 days!
M
Mick Murphy
You are despised here, by a lot of people.
I use the web interface; tell me my IP.
I use the web interface; tell me my IP.
P
Paul Montgomery
203.144.25.134
Next?
P
Paul Montgomery
Or is it 121.50.197.54
Yeah... that's it.
My crystal ball is kinda foggy tonight, old chap.
M
Mick Murphy
Wrong on BOTH guesses, poofter
K
Kayman
It doesn't matter to me nor do I care! You are an proponent of PFW and I am
not. Unless I come across non-commercial sponsored papers explaining the
usefulness of an PFW in terms of Internet Security, I'll stick with what's
written by Jesper and Steve. It is very unfortunate that their publications
are not as widely distributed and I wish more users would read their
written material. (I do very well following their advice, thank you!).
But since you're in disagreement why don't you bring it up with the
(heavyweights) authors concerned (you have read their articles, haven't
you?). Jesper and Steve can be easily approached via e-mail. I am sure
they'll respond to your concerns.
Let us know how you fare.
Subjective comment! The mere fact that the he has made a 180 degrees u-turn
in relation to usefulness of PFW's and has discontinued updating his
LeakTest application is significant indeed considering the commercial
implication this may have had on his business venture.
Besides, like or not, he still is regarded by many in high esteem...but I
don't give a hoot!
Yes, I know. It's an old hat. And then again, he just may be a bloody good
business person which by itself many regard 'morally reprehensible', oh
well
F
Flight
Paul Montgomery said:
Can we go back to the original question, please?
P
Paul Montgomery
The OP's question was answered in the first 5 replies. How many more
times does someone have to say that Windows firewall is fine?
IOW: GFY