Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
The thing is, at least on the spyware front, that most spyware requires you to be browsing in IE to become infected. Most Mac people don't use IE5 for Mac anymore, since it's so old and a piece of crap compared to Safari. Without ActiveX, it's a lot harder to get spyware on your machine. Blah, there really is no difference between OSX and a Linux desktop except that the OSX GUI is far more polished and there are more commercial apps for it. Thane Sherrington wrote: It will be interesting to see how Apple's OS handles a concentrated attack. If it cannot stand up, then it's possible that Linux may finally emerge as the safe alternative to all else. At last, an interesting scenario!
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
Spyware requires IE because that is the browser most novices use who don't know how to easily avoid spyware. Firefox does support native plugins so don't see how you can say that Firefox is really any different from IE. Eli - Original Message - The thing is, at least on the spyware front, that most spyware requires you to be browsing in IE to become infected. Most Mac people don't use IE5 for Mac anymore, since it's so old and a piece of crap compared to Safari. Without ActiveX, it's a lot harder to get spyware on your machine. Blah, there really is no difference between OSX and a Linux desktop except that the OSX GUI is far more polished and there are more commercial apps for it. Thane Sherrington wrote: It will be interesting to see how Apple's OS handles a concentrated attack. If it cannot stand up, then it's possible that Linux may finally emerge as the safe alternative to all else. At last, an interesting scenario!
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
At 09:00 AM 16/06/2005, Eli Allen wrote: Spyware requires IE because that is the browser most novices use who don't know how to easily avoid spyware. Firefox does support native plugins so don't see how you can say that Firefox is really any different from IE. Except that it doesn't support Active X, IIRC, which is the main way Spyware installs right now. And it isn't tied into the core of the OS as IE is, which has got to be a problem. T
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
Lack of support for ActiveX. Eli Allen wrote: Spyware requires IE because that is the browser most novices use who don't know how to easily avoid spyware. Firefox does support native plugins so don't see how you can say that Firefox is really any different from IE.
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
Just because it doesn't support ActiveX doesn't mean anything. As I said, spyware requires IE because that is the browser most novices use who don't know how to easily avoid spyware. There is nothing inherent about ActiveX other then it being the popular way of doing things so if another interface becomes popular I'm sure spyware will take advantage of it. Being tied to the OS doesn't mean much in terms of spyware either. All the spyware I've seen installs itself by acting as a trojan horse which basically means its an inherent problem in the user, not the OS that spyware needs to work. - Original Message - At 09:00 AM 16/06/2005, Eli Allen wrote: Spyware requires IE because that is the browser most novices use who don't know how to easily avoid spyware. Firefox does support native plugins so don't see how you can say that Firefox is really any different from IE. Except that it doesn't support Active X, IIRC, which is the main way Spyware installs right now. And it isn't tied into the core of the OS as IE is, which has got to be a problem. T
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
Native code is native code. Nothing inherent about ActiveX. - Original Message - Lack of support for ActiveX. Eli Allen wrote: Spyware requires IE because that is the browser most novices use who don't know how to easily avoid spyware. Firefox does support native plugins so don't see how you can say that Firefox is really any different from IE.
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
Same animal, different sub-species. Plugins Java do form an attack vector in FF/Moz just not as an effective one. Anytime you allow something to extend or run custom code, you're taking a risk. Gotta admit I only see IE once or twice a week these days so FF is working out as a replacement for me. Ben Ruset wrote: Lack of support for ActiveX. Eli Allen wrote: Spyware requires IE because that is the browser most novices use who don't know how to easily avoid spyware. Firefox does support native plugins so don't see how you can say that Firefox is really any different from IE.
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
At 09:39 AM 16/06/2005, Eli Allen wrote: Just because it doesn't support ActiveX doesn't mean anything. As I said, spyware requires IE Except that it avoids all the ActiveX nasties out there. Which is currently the main infection vector, as I understand it. is nothing inherent about ActiveX other then it being the popular way of doing things so if another interface becomes popular I'm sure spyware will take advantage of it. It depends on how the new interface is written. So far, the FF team has worked to remove vulnerabilities whilst MS has not (at least not as fast.) I recall that last year MS' solution to ActiveX attack was to tell people to disallow any ActiveX controls - including ones from MS. Not a pretty sight when a company can't even guarantee it's own controls are a)safe or b) actually from itself. But as FF becomes more popular, it will become more of a target. Just as Apple or Linux will as they grow market share. T
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
What vulnerabilities does ActiveX have that FF doesn't? In both cases you a prompted if you want to install, and in both cases if you say yes you get infected. Eli - Original Message - At 09:39 AM 16/06/2005, Eli Allen wrote: Just because it doesn't support ActiveX doesn't mean anything. As I said, spyware requires IE Except that it avoids all the ActiveX nasties out there. Which is currently the main infection vector, as I understand it. is nothing inherent about ActiveX other then it being the popular way of doing things so if another interface becomes popular I'm sure spyware will take advantage of it. It depends on how the new interface is written. So far, the FF team has worked to remove vulnerabilities whilst MS has not (at least not as fast.) I recall that last year MS' solution to ActiveX attack was to tell people to disallow any ActiveX controls - including ones from MS. Not a pretty sight when a company can't even guarantee it's own controls are a)safe or b) actually from itself. But as FF becomes more popular, it will become more of a target. Just as Apple or Linux will as they grow market share. T
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
Eli Allen wrote: Just because it doesn't support ActiveX doesn't mean anything. As I said, spyware requires IE because that is the browser most novices use who don't know how to easily avoid spyware. There is nothing inherent about ActiveX other then it being the popular way of doing things so if another interface becomes popular I'm sure spyware will take advantage of it. Being tied to the OS doesn't mean much in terms of spyware either. All the spyware I've seen installs itself by acting as a trojan horse which basically means its an inherent problem in the user, not the OS that spyware needs to work. - Original Message - At 09:00 AM 16/06/2005, Eli Allen wrote: Spyware requires IE because that is the browser most novices use who don't know how to easily avoid spyware. Firefox does support native plugins so don't see how you can say that Firefox is really any different from IE. Except that it doesn't support Active X, IIRC, which is the main way Spyware installs right now. And it isn't tied into the core of the OS as IE is, which has got to be a problem. T I agree 100% with Eli. Exceptions to the rule aside, just like writing software for Microsoft first tends to give you the biggest return since it is the largest market share, the same case with spyware writers. If OS-X has the leading market return, you would see spyware and viruses written for it instead. It is plain and simple economics. Microsoft OSes are default 'administrator' or privileged user, that's the real key of the problem there. I believe OS-X has some kind of user segregation as well, so that should be nice. Linux is the same as well but their GUIs tend to be laden with RPC like daemons with privileges. Sound nasty and familiar? That is exactly what Microsoft does. :) Once every OS has this segregation do you think people will simply stop? Of course not. There are ways to bypass those scenarios (find out where the default installs package in, plant trojans there when you privilege up to administrator). It's the path of least resistance in getting the biggest return for fiendish code writing. Viruses have been around for a very long time and the first one was not exclusive to DOS. Spyware was popular and sensible when Internet access has become ubiquitous. Malware that makes money! What a concept! It is a lot better than the typical geek-empowering fame and fortune scenario. Insecure infrastructures lead to this, not Active X. -- - Carroll Kong
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
Because most of the time you're NOT prompted to install. Eli Allen wrote: What vulnerabilities does ActiveX have that FF doesn't? In both cases you a prompted if you want to install, and in both cases if you say yes you get infected. Eli
Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
At 10:28 AM 16/06/2005, Ben Ruset wrote: Because most of the time you're NOT prompted to install. Aren't you listening Ben? ActiveX only poses a threat to newbies and idiots. FF is just as dangerous. You heard it here first. :P T Eli Allen wrote: What vulnerabilities does ActiveX have that FF doesn't? In both cases you a prompted if you want to install, and in both cases if you say yes you get infected. Eli __ NOD32 1.1135 (20050609) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com __ NOD32 1.1135 (20050609) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
RE: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
Because ActiveX can ride pre-approved AOX objects and -not- prompt the user to be installed. This has changed with SP2 in XP, but many users are still not running that.. prior to SP2, the prompts weren't there for objects that piggy-backed a zone (pretended to be from approved sources like MS, etc.). While it has improved, it's still not completely there, as some AOX helper objects are able to piggyback pre-approved AOX controls as 'updates' when in fact, they are not 'updates' but rather malicious BS.. see AOX that changes background wallpaper to 'smittie' virus notices.. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eli Allen Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 8:10 AM To: The Hardware List Subject: Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple What vulnerabilities does ActiveX have that FF doesn't? In both cases you a prompted if you want to install, and in both cases if you say yes you get infected. Eli - Original Message - At 09:39 AM 16/06/2005, Eli Allen wrote: Just because it doesn't support ActiveX doesn't mean anything. As I said, spyware requires IE Except that it avoids all the ActiveX nasties out there. Which is currently the main infection vector, as I understand it. is nothing inherent about ActiveX other then it being the popular way of doing things so if another interface becomes popular I'm sure spyware will take advantage of it. It depends on how the new interface is written. So far, the FF team has worked to remove vulnerabilities whilst MS has not (at least not as fast.) I recall that last year MS' solution to ActiveX attack was to tell people to disallow any ActiveX controls - including ones from MS. Not a pretty sight when a company can't even guarantee it's own controls are a)safe or b) actually from itself. But as FF becomes more popular, it will become more of a target. Just as Apple or Linux will as they grow market share. T
[H] cable modem password ?
have a best data cable modem cmx300 trying to log on with 192.168.100.1 but the usual suspects for pw do not work. any clues ? or can this only be accessed by my provider ? fp thanks -- Tallyho ! ]:8) -- Man loves little and often, woman much and rarely.
[H] Hard drive recomendation
I am building a system and since I do a lot of digital photography and video I would like the best combination of performance and storage possible. Quiet would be nice too and as such I have been looking at the 400GB Seagate Barracuda's. Unfortunately there lackluster review on storage review was disappointing and I am now looking at other drives. I have had poor luck with my last several drive purchases and am hoping that someone here could steer me to a drive that meets my needs. Thanks! -Gary
Re: [H] DiVX 6 Released
Right now everything I have is in Xvid, which I love. But there are some nice things about Divx 6. It scales up to awesome quality (comparable to Apple's H.264 some say) and awesome compression (even smaller file sizes than Xvid). Just to be picky--Apple had nothing to do with the development of H.264. As stated in the wikipedia, the H.264 standard was written by the ITU-T Video Coding Experts Group (VCEG) together with the ISO/IEC Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) as the product of a collective partnership effort known as the Joint Video Team (JVT). Apple simply implemented the codec into QuickTime7. If you had simply intended to refer to Apple's implementation of H.264, then I apologize. I just hate to see Apple get credit for something they had nothing to do with. :) Greg
Re: [H] Hard drive recomendation
I have a Media box built around a P4 Prescott 3.4 that uses a Maxtor DiamondMax 10 6L300S0 300GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache Serial ATA150 . I have been using the original version for about six months, and I just ordered this SATA II version yesterday to add to it http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822144421 They are very fast. Plenty quick enough for video editing. In fact I can't really notice a difference between it and the Raptors on my dual Xeon box. Rather then spend the money for something like Raptors, for what you want to do, I would advise you to spend any real money on RAM. Get at least 2GB, 4 would be better. I use 2GB on my Media box where I don't do a lot of multitasking. I have the swap file turned off, and my environment temp points to a 1GB RAM Drive. On my Xeon box, where I do a lot of multitasking, I have 4GB of ram, swap file turned off and a 1.5GB Ram Drive. From trial and error, I discovered that it takes 3GB of system RAM to avoid any problems, whatsoever, running any applications, in a highly multi tasked environment. With 1.5 GB of RAM, no swap file, and a 600 meg temp drive, you can get odd behavior from some apps, on a multi tasking machine, when you turn off the swap file. Move up to 2GB and most of this disappears, but if you start running a lot of programs, like, for example, VMWare, it can be problematic. However, once you go to 3GB of RAM, and boost that temp drive up to at least 1GB, all problems disappear. At least they did for me. The downside is the cost of 1GB DIMMS, if you want to go above 4X 512 = 2GB. One GB DIMMs are a small part of the market, and are expensive. I am using matched DIMMS that support Dual Channel Mode, Kingston value RAM DDR 400. I took my time, and bought my 4 1GB DIMMS on sale, with rebates, but even so they weren't cheap. Of course if, like me, you have been buying RAM for 15 plus years, it all seems cheap now. I don't have to tell you how fast a setup like this can me. There is nothing as smooth, and quick, as running out of RAM. At 09:05 AM 6/16/2005, you wrote: I am building a system and since I do a lot of digital photography and video I would like the best combination of performance and storage possible. Quiet would be nice too and as such I have been looking at the 400GB Seagate Barracuda's. Unfortunately there lackluster review on storage review was disappointing and I am now looking at other drives. I have had poor luck with my last several drive purchases and am hoping that someone here could steer me to a drive that meets my needs. Thanks! -Gary
RE: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
The real vulnerability that IE has that firefox doesn't is the way it supports scripting. In IE you can go to a page and never be prompted anything and have 30mb of crapware installed. Firefox allows you to control what type of scripting you want to allow. That is a major benefit however you shouldn't feel safe in a ff enviorement either. For work all I do is research malicious URL's and Malware and we mainly use FF when we look at pages however there are tons of ways firefox can be abused as well but its just not so common that's why its safer. If firefox hits 50% market share you will see complaints about firefox as well and then people will be raving about opera. The new IE should be pretty good and someone who worked with me just went to Microsoft to work on that project. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eli Allen Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 6:10 AM To: The Hardware List Subject: Re: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple What vulnerabilities does ActiveX have that FF doesn't? In both cases you a prompted if you want to install, and in both cases if you say yes you get infected. Eli - Original Message - At 09:39 AM 16/06/2005, Eli Allen wrote: Just because it doesn't support ActiveX doesn't mean anything. As I said, spyware requires IE Except that it avoids all the ActiveX nasties out there. Which is currently the main infection vector, as I understand it. is nothing inherent about ActiveX other then it being the popular way of doing things so if another interface becomes popular I'm sure spyware will take advantage of it. It depends on how the new interface is written. So far, the FF team has worked to remove vulnerabilities whilst MS has not (at least not as fast.) I recall that last year MS' solution to ActiveX attack was to tell people to disallow any ActiveX controls - including ones from MS. Not a pretty sight when a company can't even guarantee it's own controls are a)safe or b) actually from itself. But as FF becomes more popular, it will become more of a target. Just as Apple or Linux will as they grow market share. T
Re: [H] Hard drive recomendation
I just added a Raptor to the order. With the Raptor as the boot drive the performance of the data drive becomes a little less critical.I looked for the larger Hitachi but did not find it listed on NewEgg. The T7K250 is the same price as the 250G Barracuda. Right now I am trying to decide between the two, how loud is the Hitachi? Thanks -Gary Greg Sevart said the following on 6/16/2005 11:34 AM: You might consider the Hitachi T7K250 or the Hitachi 7K500. Both of these drives are native SATA II. Most earlier drives out there are actually PATA with a SATA adapter chip. Additionally, they support NCQ, which may help a bit on a boot drive. NCQ makes a minimal performance improvement on a data drive for a single user. The T7K250 is an updated version of the 7K250, with the native SATA II interface and NCQ, as well as increased data density (from 3 platters to two). I bought a T7K250 when I bought my Athlon 64 / NForce4 machine. The 7K500 has a similar data density, but comes with 16MB of cache. For optimal boot/scratch disk performance, however, I would consider getting a Western Digital Raptor WD740GD as a boot/scratch drive, then whatever else as a data drive. I would avoid Maxtor--they appear to be having a pretty high failure rate with the DM9 and DM10 series drives. Greg - Original Message - From: Gary Udstrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 11:05 AM Subject: [H] Hard drive recomendation I am building a system and since I do a lot of digital photography and video I would like the best combination of performance and storage possible. Quiet would be nice too and as such I have been looking at the 400GB Seagate Barracuda's. Unfortunately there lackluster review on storage review was disappointing and I am now looking at other drives. I have had poor luck with my last several drive purchases and am hoping that someone here could steer me to a drive that meets my needs. Thanks! -Gary
RE: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
At 03:01 PM 16/06/2005, Mesdaq, Ali wrote: benefit however you shouldn't feel safe in a ff enviorement either. For work all I do is research malicious URL's and Malware and we mainly use Would you mind sharing some of the URLs you are researching so we can test our systems against them? T
Re: [H] Hard drive recomendation
I have no doubt that the T7K250 is a bit louder than the Barracuda 7200.8. However, both drives will be quite quiet. (Much quieter than, say, the WD 2500JB drives). Indeed, with any modern drive, noise is not nearly as much of a concern as it once was. You would be pretty safe with either drive. The Seagate may be a tad more reliable, but the Hitachi will probably be a bit quicker. I will mention, however, that the previous generation Raptors, the 36GB variants, are significantly louder than the newer 74GB models, so make sure you stick with the WD740GD. Greg - Original Message - From: Gary Udstrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 1:24 PM Subject: Re: [H] Hard drive recomendation I just added a Raptor to the order. With the Raptor as the boot drive the performance of the data drive becomes a little less critical.I looked for the larger Hitachi but did not find it listed on NewEgg. The T7K250 is the same price as the 250G Barracuda. Right now I am trying to decide between the two, how loud is the Hitachi? Thanks -Gary Greg Sevart said the following on 6/16/2005 11:34 AM: You might consider the Hitachi T7K250 or the Hitachi 7K500. Both of these drives are native SATA II. Most earlier drives out there are actually PATA with a SATA adapter chip. Additionally, they support NCQ, which may help a bit on a boot drive. NCQ makes a minimal performance improvement on a data drive for a single user. The T7K250 is an updated version of the 7K250, with the native SATA II interface and NCQ, as well as increased data density (from 3 platters to two). I bought a T7K250 when I bought my Athlon 64 / NForce4 machine. The 7K500 has a similar data density, but comes with 16MB of cache. For optimal boot/scratch disk performance, however, I would consider getting a Western Digital Raptor WD740GD as a boot/scratch drive, then whatever else as a data drive. I would avoid Maxtor--they appear to be having a pretty high failure rate with the DM9 and DM10 series drives. Greg - Original Message - From: Gary Udstrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 11:05 AM Subject: [H] Hard drive recomendation I am building a system and since I do a lot of digital photography and video I would like the best combination of performance and storage possible. Quiet would be nice too and as such I have been looking at the 400GB Seagate Barracuda's. Unfortunately there lackluster review on storage review was disappointing and I am now looking at other drives. I have had poor luck with my last several drive purchases and am hoping that someone here could steer me to a drive that meets my needs. Thanks! -Gary
Re: [H] DiVX 6 Released
Thanks for the explanation. Jeff - Original Message - From: Brian Weeden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hwg hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 6:46 AM Subject: Re: [H] DiVX 6 Released Why would you have to do that, Brian? http://www.divx.com/divx/dmf.php Right now everything I have is in Xvid, which I love. But there are some nice things about Divx 6. It scales up to awesome quality (comparable to Apple's H.264 some say) and awesome compression (even smaller file sizes than Xvid). But what really draws my attention is the built-in metadata tags, chaptering, subtitles, multiple audio tracks, and menu structure. One of the problems I currently find with my HTPC is library organization and searching. I have to have every file in a specific naming convention for the software (Meedio in my case) to be able to find and play them. This gets pretty tedius. I think there is a way to add metadata to regular avi files but as far as I know it is not really part of the standard and I haven't gotten it to work very well. Now, you're right that I don't HAVE to re-do everything. But it would be nice to have everything in the best format :) -- Brian
RE: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
At 04:06 PM 16/06/2005, Mesdaq, Ali wrote: What are you looking to do exactly? I was thinking hardening a system, then taking it to a malicious page, and see if the hardening protected it. T
Re: [H] Hard drive recomendation
I am getting 2G of RAM (2x1G, that is the max that the Shuttle SN25P will hold). I like the idea of having a Raptor for the boot drive and applications and a couple of drives for data. I also added a Sapphire Raedon X800XL video card (that should make the kids happy). Thanks to all for you help! :-) -Gary Winterlight said the following on 6/16/2005 1:00 PM: I have a Media box built around a P4 Prescott 3.4 that uses a Maxtor DiamondMax 10 6L300S0 300GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache Serial ATA150 . I have been using the original version for about six months, and I just ordered this SATA II version yesterday to add to it http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822144421 They are very fast. Plenty quick enough for video editing. In fact I can't really notice a difference between it and the Raptors on my dual Xeon box. Rather then spend the money for something like Raptors, for what you want to do, I would advise you to spend any real money on RAM. Get at least 2GB, 4 would be better. I use 2GB on my Media box where I don't do a lot of multitasking. I have the swap file turned off, and my environment temp points to a 1GB RAM Drive. On my Xeon box, where I do a lot of multitasking, I have 4GB of ram, swap file turned off and a 1.5GB Ram Drive. From trial and error, I discovered that it takes 3GB of system RAM to avoid any problems, whatsoever, running any applications, in a highly multi tasked environment. With 1.5 GB of RAM, no swap file, and a 600 meg temp drive, you can get odd behavior from some apps, on a multi tasking machine, when you turn off the swap file. Move up to 2GB and most of this disappears, but if you start running a lot of programs, like, for example, VMWare, it can be problematic. However, once you go to 3GB of RAM, and boost that temp drive up to at least 1GB, all problems disappear. At least they did for me. The downside is the cost of 1GB DIMMS, if you want to go above 4X 512 = 2GB. One GB DIMMs are a small part of the market, and are expensive. I am using matched DIMMS that support Dual Channel Mode, Kingston value RAM DDR 400. I took my time, and bought my 4 1GB DIMMS on sale, with rebates, but even so they weren't cheap. Of course if, like me, you have been buying RAM for 15 plus years, it all seems cheap now. I don't have to tell you how fast a setup like this can me. There is nothing as smooth, and quick, as running out of RAM. At 09:05 AM 6/16/2005, you wrote: I am building a system and since I do a lot of digital photography and video I would like the best combination of performance and storage possible. Quiet would be nice too and as such I have been looking at the 400GB Seagate Barracuda's. Unfortunately there lackluster review on storage review was disappointing and I am now looking at other drives. I have had poor luck with my last several drive purchases and am hoping that someone here could steer me to a drive that meets my needs. Thanks! -Gary
Re: [H] Hard drive recomendation
At 03:25 PM 6/16/2005, Gary Udstrand typed: I am getting 2G of RAM (2x1G, that is the max that the Shuttle SN25P will hold). I like the idea of having a Raptor for the boot drive and applications and a couple of drives for data. I also added a Sapphire Raedon X800XL video card (that should make the kids happy). Are you sure you don't want to adopt me. ;-) --+-- Wayne D. Johnson Ashland, OH, USA 44805 http://www.wavijo.com
RE: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple
Well if you want to test that I have a perl script you can use to test to see if your machine has any new files on it. So what you can do is browse sites that are most prone to trying to exploit your browser ie porn, hacking, misc. Then you run the script and it will display any new files of course not counting jpegs and other common browsing files. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thane Sherrington Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 12:21 PM To: The Hardware List Subject: RE: [H] Dvorak's take on Intel-Apple At 04:06 PM 16/06/2005, Mesdaq, Ali wrote: What are you looking to do exactly? I was thinking hardening a system, then taking it to a malicious page, and see if the hardening protected it. T
Re: [H] Hard drive recomendation
Sure, then you can buy me the PC for Father's Day! :-) LOL. -Gary Wayne Johnson said the following on 6/16/2005 3:00 PM: At 03:25 PM 6/16/2005, Gary Udstrand typed: I am getting 2G of RAM (2x1G, that is the max that the Shuttle SN25P will hold). I like the idea of having a Raptor for the boot drive and applications and a couple of drives for data. I also added a Sapphire Raedon X800XL video card (that should make the kids happy). Are you sure you don't want to adopt me. ;-) --+-- Wayne D. Johnson Ashland, OH, USA 44805 http://www.wavijo.com
[H] BitTorrent
From Securing the Enterprise: Anti-spyware advocates cry foul as the popular peer-to-peer protocol becomes the latest mechanism for the stealthy distribution of adware/spyware bundles. http://ct.enews.eweek.com/rd/cts?d=186-2159-5-92-42064-245376-0-0-0-1 Robert Turnbull, Toronto, Canada
RE: [H] BitTorrent
From: Robert Turnbull [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] BitTorrent Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 19:32:12 -0400 From Securing the Enterprise: Anti-spyware advocates cry foul as the popular peer-to-peer protocol becomes the latest mechanism for the stealthy distribution of adware/spyware bundles. http://ct.enews.eweek.com/rd/cts?d=186-2159-5-92-42064-245376-0-0-0-1 Officials from MMG did not respond to queries for comment. On its Web site [www.marketingmetrixgroup.com], the company lists BitTorrent as a lucrative adware distribution vehicle. Although Bit Torrent is a file format and not a P2P Network ? [it] is the fastest growing protocol for file sharing online. Many top Bit Torrent sites such as SuprNova, Lokitorren and Bit Tower support millions of downloads daily, said MMG, which lists PartyPoker.com and Hotbar.com among other clients on its roster. I wonder if the company is happy with this newfound exposure in the media? Let's look at their website: http://www.marketingmetrixgroup.com/
Re: [H] BitTorrent
FYI the problem is not with BitTorrent itself but with people downloading files and malware being hidden the file. Usually they grab a TV episode and it comes as an .exe or a .rar and when they run it the malware installs. I would hope most of the people on this list know not to run random .exes The article also mentions that there are some BitTorrent clients out there being distributed some shady sources but again, never download and install software from a site you don't know. -- Brian
[H] OT: Newer Nero available.. Nero-6.6.0.14
In the usual places... -- JRS [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please remove **X** to reply... Facts do not cease to exist just because they are ignored.
Re: [H] BitTorrent
LOL. Hacked already. :) I wonder if the company is happy with this newfound exposure in the media? Let's look at their website: http://www.marketingmetrixgroup.com/ -- JRS [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please remove **X** to reply... Facts do not cease to exist just because they are ignored.
