Text 7009, 81 rader
Skriven 2005-04-19 14:01:00 av August Abolins (1:229/390)
   Kommentar till text 6949 av Jeff Guerdat (1:106/2000.0)
Ärende: Sp 2 ?
==============
Hi Jeff (of 1:106/2000),
On <Fri, 15 Apr 05, 06:52 o'clock>, you wrote me:

 JG> I strongly suggest that you DO load SP and all current fixes.  There
 JG> are just too many fixes in there to ignore.  Just because you're 
 JG> behind a firewall of
 JG> any kind doesn't mean you're safe...

Point taken.   But here is something I read in a W98 discussion area:

================================================================
Thread-Topic: Windows Security
From: =?Utf-8?B?RGFu?= <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com>
Subject: Windows Security
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 08:53:03 -0700

My opinion is this --- after my XP PRO. SP2 was hacked we need more security 
in the software industry --- Fortunately, 98SE survived a hack from the 
government of China that was almost an 18,000 hack from China's government 
according to Zone Alarm Professional's tracking.  The problem is many fold:

1.  Hardware Routers can be interupted --- mine was with Cox Communications 
broadband --- after the router was interupted the hacker(s) gained access to 
the time and changed the password thus locking me out and destroying defense 
line one.  This was a wired hardware router.  If the signal is interupted all 
one must do is type -- admin and admin and the Cisco Systems (LinkSys -- $80 
wired ethernet cat-5 router is bypassed and thus defense number 1 is down.

2. Next the hackers took advantage of the inherent weakness in the NT (New 
Technology aka Not There) source code of Windows XP Service Pack 2.  My 
operating system had all ports locked down, Windows Messenger Disabled and 
used SpywareBlaster, Spybot Search and Destroy, Adaware SE, Computer 
Associates EZARMOR (the complete suite with a bi-directional software 
firewall and an antivirus package) --- taking advantage of the buffer 
underrun was fairly easy for a sophisticated hacker --- I could do it if I 
was a bad person.  I have weblinks from EEYE Digital Security and Chris 
Quirke, MVP to prove my point about the lack of the secure foundation in XP 
PROFESSIONAL Service Pack 2 and despite what Mr. Gary S. Terhune says about 
XP PRO. SP2 being more secure he is simply mistaken and has fallen hook, line 
and sinker for the Microsoft Line.  Anyway, according to the history on 
Microsoft -- Microsoft's software engineers called the NT source code the Not 
There Source code because it did not rest on a solid foundation like the 9x 
source code does.  Microsoft has tried to save money by elimating the 9x 
consumer line by not having cordless keyboards and not having cordless mice 
for 98SE.  Also, AFAIK, the latest version of Intellipoint driver for 98SE 
disabled some abilities and they were the forward and backwards button.  My 
IBM PCJR which I still had when I grew up in New York City (Manhatten) had a 
simple infared senser (I think) to use wireless technology and this was in 
1982!!!  Talk about the computer industry going backwards since the glory 
days of the IBM (International Business Machine)  It used 2 AA batteries in 
the keyboard -- you just removed the battery cover and installed the battery. 
 Anyway, 98 Second Edition rests upon MS-DOS (Microsoft Disk Operating 
System) and some of you may remember the war between Microsoft and IBM in the 
DOS arena (IBM DOS vs. Microsoft DOS).  Much as Microsoft would like to 
mislead people into thinking XP PRO. SP2 is the most secure operating system 
out there -- this is a deception -- The NT source code has been released over 
the Internet -- the 9x source code has not -- thus making the NT source code 
-- vulnerable to attacks by the NT (New Technology) Source Code.
Anyway, Anthony needs to use David's computer so I will continue this debate 
later.

http://www.eeye.com/html/research/upcoming/index.html

http://www.eeye.com/html/research/upcoming/20050316.html

http://www.eeye.com/html/research/upcoming/20050329.html

Notice how the second web-link attacks the weak XP SP2 while the third 
web-link from my friends at eEye attacks all Windows Operating Systems.  
Therefore the conclusion, must be drawn that Unix/Linux is more secure than 
Windows because it is open and not closed source.

http://cquirke.mvps.org/whatmos.htm

=====================================================================


d(-_-)b  ...August

--- FMail/Win32 1.60
 * Origin: . (1:229/390)