A Chara Steve,
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 5:54:54 PM, you wrote:
SL> Yeah, block outbound connections to port 1975, yay, that was hard. No, it
SL> shouldn't be accepted but paranoia is also not to be accepted. I'm big on
SL> privacy, but I'm also tired of all the bogus alerts going around which are not
SL> confirmed through people who stake their names and reputations on verifying
SL> such exploits and privacy violations.
Sorry to butt in, but you are talking about paranoia? :-) I used the
mentioned cleaner posted here to get rid of the files in question from
my system and the source is 100% OK.
I tracked all changes that the cleaner made as well WHEN IT WAS running and
compared registry before and after running it. ALL fine.
Privacy is privacy. Sneaky tactics are sneaky tactics. These companies
need to get with the program and shouldn't get away with it. If they
don't have our permission then they just shouldn't be allowed to do
it. Yeah, blocking a port is OK, and easy, but how many blasted ports
do we end up blocking?
Slan,
Simon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
L�homme est bien insens�. Il ne saurait forger un ciron, et forge des Dieux �
douzaines!
(Man is quite insane. He cannot create a maggot, and he creates Gods by the dozen)
MONTAIGNE 1533-1592
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : [email protected]
