Slashdot Mirror

The 1st real guide for that & it really works -> http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

(I HAVEN'T FOUND AN OLDER (or better) ONE YET ONLINE TO DATE EITHER...)

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"APK, thanks for such a great guide. This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures. Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING! NO PROBLEMS!" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=3

"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008. Great stuff! My client STILL Hasn't

The 1st real guide for that & it really works -> http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

(I HAVEN'T FOUND AN OLDER (or better) ONE YET ONLINE TO DATE EITHER...)

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"APK, thanks for such a great guide. This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures. Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING! NO PROBLEMS!" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=3

"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008. Great stuff! My client STILL Hasn't

"Is there no one else? IS THERE NO ONE ELSE??" from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BiLCJxpqi4 & of course from me lol, A Killeus, son of Peleus (invincible & invulnerable - as I stand before all of "trolldom", lol, here on /.)!

Especially since YOU "went down" just like Boagreus... lol, instantly due to your not reading the source article, on this very topic from it vs. your ERRONEOUS FAIL, lol:

---

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"Update: Tom just pointed out that turning off Windows Defender, which basically is Microsoft Security Essentials, in Windows 8 will resolve the issue. " FROM -> http://www.ghacks.net/2012/08/19/you-cant-block-facebook-using-windows-8s-hosts-file/ , the source article for this topic, today... lol!

---

So, now WHAT was that you said again? Oh yea:

"How will APK stay relevant with the demise of the hosts file in Windows 8? Stay tuned...." - by metrix007 (200091) on Sunday August 19, @04:24PM (#41048097)

You FAIL, troll - see above... & modding down my original of pointing your FAIL out? Ineffective & effete... I won't ALLOW it!

"Yea, though I walk thru the VALLEY OF THE TROLLS, I shall fear no evil trolls: For thou art with me" as THE LORD OF HOSTS -> FROM http://www.rzim.org/slice/slicearticleprint.aspx?aid=8423

---

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"The image this title brings to mind is of a mighty military commander, one who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power."

Of which custom hosts files are a part in doing this in its entirety (which of course, I authored YEARS before there really was a PC security industry/field as there is now) which works when followed to-the-letter based on industry security "best practices" & beyond:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

First of its kind... to date, I haven't found one older online and it really does work via "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" principles, the best thing we have going today in the online world of malicious code exploits...

metrix007 - or, lmao, should I say, "Boagreus"?

9x now & you can't disprove my points on hosts files benefits to end users... neither can anyone here in "trolldom" @ /. either!

APK

P.S.=> I love it... thanks for making ME, look good, & YOU TROLLS by way of comparison? "Not so good"... lmao!...

... apk

See this first - it's the power of links YOU all gave me as you said, lol -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3058625&cid=41049299

* Like the analogy? It fits...

PLUS, the trolling post starter "metrix007" whose taken a beating from me 8x over the years here on hosts files that started the thread trollingly directed MY way as usual:

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3058625&cid=41048097

?

Hehe, he's "Boagreus" in that film clip already, down for the count, silenced (... lol!)

---

To quote "the Lord Humungous" from "The Road Warrior"?

"I AM THE LORD OF THE WASTELAND (lol, slashdot): ALL THAT EXISTS HERE, IS MINE!"

Except I suppose, you can call me this: "The Lord of HOSTS", per the topic of course, ala -> http://www.rzim.org/slice/slicearticleprint.aspx?aid=8423

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"The image this title brings to mind is of a mighty military commander, one who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power."

---

The protective power, of hosts files IN combination with filtering DNS servers, firewalls, & other forms of "Layered-Security"/"Defense-in-Depth", ala this:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

Also courtesy of "yours truly"... lol! You asked for links? You got 'em, upon request.

APK

P.S.=> Proof? Ok, and its LINKS, like you said I use... hey. it's solid proof in black & white!

---

My initial reply to metrix007 showing he blew it off the bat on hosts & Windows 8 (lol, Boagreus):

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3058625&cid=41048263

"Metrix007 & Boagreus LIVED BY THE SWORD, they died by it too... lol!"

---

Then, his FINAL defeat (in a single blow like AKilleus son of Peleus did him, in the film clip) metrix007 blown away on yet another troll point of his -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3058625&cid=41048363

Now, you KNOW I've just GOTTA say it, as-is-per-my-usual "inimitable style":

This? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2ez'"

(Just like taking down metrix & 3-4 others right after he during my challenge to ANY here to disprove my points on hosts files & benefits I listed they give users)... apk

Have you heard of the Grace L. Ferguson Airline and Storm Door Company?

"Can you think of an effective way for non-government affiliated denizens of the Internet to respond to such emerging scenarios where geo-politically driven cyber-conflicts have the potential to harm non-participants?" - by Doubting Sapien (2448658) on Thursday August 09, @04:21PM (#40937259)

PROTECTING YOURSELF IS "JOB #1", & if you want to do a job right? Do it yourself... & learn how to during that time, with a little help/guidance!

Read, & apply what's in the link below, to-the-letter, IF you use a Windows-based system!

(CIS tool for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 = FREE, & CIS Tool for Windows 7 has a 30 day trial: Trust me, you won't need it for THAT long! It makes it fun, almost like running a system performance benchmark for speed/efficiency tuning, albeit, this is for security-hardening your system instead).

This is a guide I'd written since 1997-2007 that actually works:

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"APK, thanks for such a great guide. This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures. Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING! NO PROBLEMS!" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

In a dozen different places online.

You'll need to find a local FFL holder to ship it to, though. Usually it's that place around town where you see cars parked with NRA stickers.

EA can't claim to be the originator of online People/Life Simulations because of these programs released in the mid-80s (on Commodore 64):

home: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Computer_People Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_(video_game) Sequel: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=habitat+club+caribe

You sneaky jerk! Now I can no longer honestly say I've never used Bing.

EA can't claim to be the originator of online People/Life Simulations because of these programs released in the mid-80s (on Commodore 64):

home: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Computer_People
Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_(video_game)
Sequel: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=habitat+club+caribe

The apparent amazement about the "plastic" pistol is a bit baffling. I mean come on.

And as far as concern over someone who can not lawfully own a gun using a 3d printer to manufacture a weapon, really? For a very small amount of money pretty much anyone who wants can go buy a gun on the street. For slightly more money they can purchase a totally legal gun through the classifieds or a gun show.

The most clear cut example of evil I've seen from Google so far? Compare Bing's search on Googirl: googirl

To Google's results: googirl

Doctored or what? Admittedly, not really really evil. But Google does swear up and down they don't do this. Perhaps... only when they feel like it?

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=starfish+explosions&qpvt=starfish+explosions&FORM=IGRE

And yet, unlike Nokia, they still are making a profit every quarter. Their stock may have fallen but its is in the oversold regime: price to earnings ration is just 4.4. While their predicted P/E does get worse but 15.44 is low for a tech company, and very low compared to facebook at 105. http://www.bing.com/finance?q=RIMM

I practice the BEST THING WE HAVE GOING (vs. malware, malscripted sites, advertiser tracking, & FAR more) in "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth", because it actually works -> http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

* Hosts files are just more efficient because of the layer of access/privelege they run in as a mere filter for the IP stack itself... but layered defense, including firewall rules tables, browser security addons, system tweaks for security, patching apps & the Operating System conscientiously, & user education vs. threats online, are the best you can do, & yes, they actually WORK!

APK

P.S.=> I invite ANYONE to disprove the points I made on custom hosts files and the benefits they give end users in the following things online:

1.) Better speed/bandwidth
2.) Better "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth"
3.) Better screen realestate
4.) Better tracking defense
5.) Better 'anonymity' (to an extent vs. DNS request logs, or vs. unjust DNSBL's (DNS blocklists) you feel are unjust)
6.) Better than browser addons for efficiency

& more...

Because, until the trolls around here do? Well... they only remind me of what happened to the HULK (vs. Thor) in this clip from the excellent 2012 film "The Avengers" (where Hulk gets 1st FLOORED, & then pinned & trapped beneath Thor's hammer (& is unable to escape or move it)):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Attt4dVu0U&feature=related [youtube.com]

Since everytime I post that list?? Not a SINGLE /. TROLL has managed to disprove its points... not a one, for years now... lol!

... apk

I looked at the web site, and I thought it _was_ an Apple announcement.

That is the metro aesthetic that Microsoft has been using in many of their web properties since the Zune HD. See: zune, kinect xbox Windows 8 bing microsoft.com

block out the Microsoft logos and it would be hard to tell the difference between that and an Apple page.

It's easy to tell the difference. Apple is still big on fake reflections, shadows, gradients, bevels, faux 3D effects like paper curling, point of view icons, etc. Metro eschews these elements in favor of bold colors, lots of white space, and simple flat iconography.

http://www.bing.com/maps/Help/VE3DInstall/

Of the concept I illustrated here of most used = most attacked on ANY computing platform -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2899979&cid=40255631

(Which, from the malware maker/botnet herder's "point-of-view" MAKES TONS OF SENSE... To I.E.-> Expend more efforts where the greatest amount of returns will come from, & that is where the MOST "easy-meat noob" users are to be victimized (the most used OS platforms)).

* You can say what you wish, but it proves my point for me, easily, & with a CONCRETE undeniable example...

APK

P.S.=>

"these problem don't occur in gnu/linux (as opposed to android/linux) for a number of reasons" - by lister king of smeg (2481612) on Friday June 08, @11:51AM (#40258177)

Well, I can say (and show testimonials of it too, not just say it) the SAME about Windows NT-based OS, once "security-hardened" above the DEFAULT configuration (which I've been doing guides online for users since oh, 1997 onwards):

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"APK, thanks for such a great guide. This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures. Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING! NO PROBLEMS!" -

"No operating system is 'unassailable'. " - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06, @09:32AM (#40231439)

See subject & I absolutely am (for now @ least vs. this particular threat, via 4 methods (patch by MS, custom hosts file blocking of "flame"'s C&C servers that are known, & security hardening my system + the OS I use)):

PROOF? Ok!

http://www.net-security.org/malware_news.php?id=2138

Flame's massive C&C infrastructure revealed - Posted on 05.06.2012:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

---

"It's interesting to mention that these machines mostly run Windows XP and Windows 7 32 bit, but none of them run Windows 7 64 bit, which seems impervious against this and most other malware."

---

* Especially when "security-hardened" as I have done for Windows NT-based systems since the early 1990's:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

RESULTS OF SUCH SYSTEM SECURITY HARDENING BY TESTIMONIAL OVER 1 YEAR BY A USER OF MY GUIDES FOR SECURITY:

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"No operating system is 'unassailable'. " - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06, @09:32AM (#40231439)

See subject & I absolutely am (for now @ least vs. this particular threat, via 4 methods (patch by MS, custom hosts file blocking of "flame"'s C&C servers that are known, & security hardening my system + the OS I use)):

PROOF? Ok!

http://www.net-security.org/malware_news.php?id=2138

Flame's massive C&C infrastructure revealed - Posted on 05.06.2012:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

---

"It's interesting to mention that these machines mostly run Windows XP and Windows 7 32 bit, but none of them run Windows 7 64 bit, which seems impervious against this and most other malware."

---

* Especially when "security-hardened" as I have done for Windows NT-based systems since the early 1990's:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

RESULTS OF SUCH SYSTEM SECURITY HARDENING BY TESTIMONIAL OVER 1 YEAR BY A USER OF MY GUIDES FOR SECURITY:

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

See subject-line, & this -> http://www.net-security.org/malware_news.php?id=2138

Flame's massive C&C infrastructure revealed - Posted on 05.06.2012:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

---

"It's interesting to mention that these machines mostly run Windows XP and Windows 7 32 bit, but none of them run Windows 7 64 bit, which seems impervious against this and most other malware."

---

* Especially when "security-hardened" as I have done for Windows NT-based systems since the early 1990's:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

(I can't be harmed by this bogus puny machination the malware making weasels make... no way, no how, not possible!)

APK

P.S.=> It's part of why I use it... apk

As for styling them differently, using a new color seems confusing without also adding a legend.

I guess what I really want you guys to do is add a legend. :-)

A different road color could mean the highway is more/less prominent or (in some areas) a seasonal route.

Well, I also think these should be better indicated. For instance, read the first part of my post here, comparing the view of Google Maps to Bing.

Let's see if I can explain my main gripes with Google Maps. This is long, so if you actually read it I thank you (and it's pretty cool that you responded in the first place, BTW... maybe you can convince people to add an "informative map" view :-)). And don't take it too personally; I whine about software a lot, and Google Maps is kinda software. :-)

Viewed on my 1080p 22" monitor, the scale of this map appears at roughly the same real size as it does in my Rand McNally road atlas. Google's is actually about 60% bigger, which just adds strength to my arguments. (The distance from Platteville to the Madison Capitol building is 11.3mm on screen and 7.2mm on paper.) On the Google map, I can discern two kinds of roads: limited access highways and other highways. In the atlas, that cross section has limited access highways, other multilane highways, principle highways, other through highways, and other roads (reading off their key). In other areas of the country toll roads would also be visible, and presumably in others there would also be unpaved roads. (It's in the legend but I don't know where it ever appears.) On Google's map, there are 12 unique route markers visible. On Rand McNally's, I picked a somewhat random 1 inch by 1 inch square; it had 8. (The square was around House on the Rock and Talesin, two things that aren't on Google's map.)

If we zoom in one notch, a bunch of additional roads appear. (In fairness, there are now far more roads than appear on the Rand McNally atlas.) But there's no distinction between them. On that map, County Road H ("other road (conditions vary -- local inquiry suggested)" in the atlas legend) appears to me exactly the same as US-18 east of Dodgeville ("principle highway"), except that the latter has a route designator at that zoom level. You have to zoom in again before the route designators for the county highways (or WI-23 going north from Dodgeville ("other through highway")) appear -- two levels in from "60% larger than printed atlas".

Now let's compare to Bing. (I don't actually know how this'll go; we'll see.) At nearly the same zoom level as the first Google map we looked at (11.5mm from Platteville to central Madison, probably within my measurement error from Google's 11.3), Bing is missing several roads that appear on Google's. On the other hand, it has many more town names (like Monticello and New Glarus). If we zoom in once, they seem to have about the same roads on them, though the're a little hard to see on Bing's map and I actually had to zoom in again to actually establish that they are, in fact, roads. But we do see that WI-23 north of Dodgeville is decidedly indicated as a more major road than a lot of the county roads (the whisker-thin lines) and yet less than US-18 and US-151. Interestingly, US-18 west of Dodgeville is marked as a noticably more major road than it appears in either Google Map

As for styling them differently, using a new color seems confusing without also adding a legend.

I guess what I really want you guys to do is add a legend. :-)

A different road color could mean the highway is more/less prominent or (in some areas) a seasonal route.

Well, I also think these should be better indicated. For instance, read the first part of my post here, comparing the view of Google Maps to Bing.

Let's see if I can explain my main gripes with Google Maps. This is long, so if you actually read it I thank you (and it's pretty cool that you responded in the first place, BTW... maybe you can convince people to add an "informative map" view :-)). And don't take it too personally; I whine about software a lot, and Google Maps is kinda software. :-)

Viewed on my 1080p 22" monitor, the scale of this map appears at roughly the same real size as it does in my Rand McNally road atlas. Google's is actually about 60% bigger, which just adds strength to my arguments. (The distance from Platteville to the Madison Capitol building is 11.3mm on screen and 7.2mm on paper.) On the Google map, I can discern two kinds of roads: limited access highways and other highways. In the atlas, that cross section has limited access highways, other multilane highways, principle highways, other through highways, and other roads (reading off their key). In other areas of the country toll roads would also be visible, and presumably in others there would also be unpaved roads. (It's in the legend but I don't know where it ever appears.) On Google's map, there are 12 unique route markers visible. On Rand McNally's, I picked a somewhat random 1 inch by 1 inch square; it had 8. (The square was around House on the Rock and Talesin, two things that aren't on Google's map.)

If we zoom in one notch, a bunch of additional roads appear. (In fairness, there are now far more roads than appear on the Rand McNally atlas.) But there's no distinction between them. On that map, County Road H ("other road (conditions vary -- local inquiry suggested)" in the atlas legend) appears to me exactly the same as US-18 east of Dodgeville ("principle highway"), except that the latter has a route designator at that zoom level. You have to zoom in again before the route designators for the county highways (or WI-23 going north from Dodgeville ("other through highway")) appear -- two levels in from "60% larger than printed atlas".

Now let's compare to Bing. (I don't actually know how this'll go; we'll see.) At nearly the same zoom level as the first Google map we looked at (11.5mm from Platteville to central Madison, probably within my measurement error from Google's 11.3), Bing is missing several roads that appear on Google's. On the other hand, it has many more town names (like Monticello and New Glarus). If we zoom in once, they seem to have about the same roads on them, though the're a little hard to see on Bing's map and I actually had to zoom in again to actually establish that they are, in fact, roads. But we do see that WI-23 north of Dodgeville is decidedly indicated as a more major road than a lot of the county roads (the whisker-thin lines) and yet less than US-18 and US-151. Interestingly, US-18 west of Dodgeville is marked as a noticably more major road than it appears in either Google Map

Not dozens of road types, hundreds of various symbols etc that you see in some road maps

And this is my problem with it; you say "the philosophy is simplicity and clarity", I say "the philosophy is have far less information" and then dispute the "clarity" part.

Here's another example; I'll just compare to Bing maps because I like them the best (in no small part because they seem to be the closest to printed maps). Compare this to this. (Durrr, I can link the maps directly, I don't need to take a screenshot and upload them.)

On Bing's map, the distinction between the main routes through the area (US 65 and US 412) and others is very clear. It's there in Google's, but it's far far less pronounced. Furthermore, Bing makes a distinction between AR-7 (going south from Harrison) and US-62 (upper-left corner, where US-412 turns south), versus the other roads that are shown on the map, like AR-43 and AR-397. That distinction isn't visible on Google's at all.

Without a legend you don't know what kind of roads those are, but from the information there you can at least get a good sense of what are likely to be major routes.

And that also provides a good illustration of my counter argument to your "clarity" statement. To me, the distinctions made on the Bing map actually make it much easier to read... the Google version comparatively just looks like a big jumble of roads.

When you do actually want to see a route, you are told which roads are toll roads, and you can have option to adjust and avoid them.

But... it's not just that! If you want to say "are there decent toll-free routes" you have to try a bunch of things. With an actually good road map, you just look. Furthermore, it's not just a matter of "toll roads are A-OK!" and "avoid toll roads"; one part may have an easily-avoidable toll while another may not.

Sure, you can adjust each segment individually, but then you run into the first problem. Now you have to figure out what part of the map corresponds to the turn-by-turn direction that is a toll road (even just hovering over the turn-by-turn directions is an active action you have to take)*, try a different route, see if it's still marked as a toll, try a different route, see if it's still marked as a toll, etc.

* Actually counting this against Google's approach isn't quite fair; in both Bing and Mapquest, the route line they draw on the map covers over the toll indications. So if you want to try other routes to avoid tolls, you have to do the same thing.

Think about it: It's NOT so different from folks creating DNSBL's by coordinating w/ one another on WHICH sites/servers are hosting botnet C&C servers (to block them out) OR doing what I do with custom HOSTS files, which is Blocking out KNOWN sites/servers/hosts-domains that:

---

A.) Host malicious script in their content
B.) Host malicious script in their adbanners
C.) Serve up malwares

---

Between securing a system & educating end-users more/better on the sources of attack + conscientious patching OR even "security hardening" tweaking (such as cutting off services you don't need that MAY have remote exploit vulnerabilities + far more), & group security based policies, ala guides like this one:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

Which, in essence & practice does ALL of the above (mostly in stopping users from indiscriminately accessing the MOST USED THREATS against them), typically of:

---

1.) Maliciously scripted website pages (mostly javascript)
2.) Faulty JAVA apps or exploits of JAVA vulnerabilities
3.) Faulty Adobe apps (e.g. - FLASH exploits)

---

?

* You've got MOST of the game "licked"/beaten... I've been doing it MOSTLY via sites that host information on KNOWN sites/servers/hosts-domains that block ALL of the above known threats... & yes, it actually works!

The community online's been taking care of itself on THAT front, via lists for custom DNSBL's &/or custom HOSTS files for a LONG TIME now... & again - it works, for the same ideas/principles these guys are reaching for now (community sharing of vital information - in essence/effect, a sort of "security crowd-sourcing")...

THUS, above & beyond std. client-side workstation node security, server-level security + app level security & patching?

The rest you'd get by blocking out those KNOWN malicious sites/servers/hosts-domains (& their pages known to serve up malicious script OR malwares + botnet C&C servers etc./et al...)

APK

P.S.=> It could be an aid to a principle I've been using for decades of "what you can't touch, can't hurt you" & by blocking out those things enumerated above? You get that...

Simply thru sharing such information for blocking them off from users either thru custom HOSTS files, firewall rules tables, OR DNSBL's server-side @ the DNS server level (preferably ALL 3 measures in combination, along with ONLY USING JAVA or JavaScript + plugins in FLASH only where you ABSOLUTELY NEED THEM for function only) - it could be a VERY effective tool vs. online exploit (& it does work, I've been doing the same basic idea for decades along with many users)... apk

Anyway, you guys need to come join our wonderful 'write an X on paper' system. We get results the same night, too.

We had mechanical voting booths in the Bronx and NY in general, but then had to change to electronic ones to comply with federal law. (Stupid HAVA.)

Bloomberg called its first use on primary day 2010 a "royal screw-up". I've voted with both old and new machines, and while both seemed to work well, who knows what bits flipped (or were flipped) between feed and count. Personally I think the change was as necessary as the impending invasion of internet TLDs (i.e. not at all).

Yeah THEY say they are losing money on CDs so they can convince politicians to pass ProtectIP and CISPA laws. Also the ACTA treaty. But in reality they are now making a ton of money off single sales, and that is more than offsetting any loss from CDs:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=music+industry+making+more+money+than+ever

You realize that posting a link to a set of search results doesn't prove anything, right? Because otherwise...

I've just proved that the earth is only 6000 years old.

Now I've proved that we never went to the moon.

And just to godwin this conversation, here's proof that the holocaust was a lie.

You realize that posting a link to a set of search results doesn't prove anything, right? Because otherwise...

I've just proved that the earth is only 6000 years old.

Now I've proved that we never went to the moon.

And just to godwin this conversation, here's proof that the holocaust was a lie.

You realize that posting a link to a set of search results doesn't prove anything, right? Because otherwise...

I've just proved that the earth is only 6000 years old.

Now I've proved that we never went to the moon.

And just to godwin this conversation, here's proof that the holocaust was a lie.

Here's thousands of documents about CFLs and their failure modes (including premature heat death, and bursting into flame or smoking)

http://www.bing.com/search?q=CFL+failures

What are you talking about?

I see no evidence that Google is asserting copyright over search results. Go ahead do a search and look for a copyright symbol...there is none.
https://www.google.com/search?q=linux

As a comparison do a Bing search and Microsoft does assert its copyright at the bottom of every page.
http://www.bing.com/search?q=linux

Copyright has nothing to do with terms of service. Google is under no obligation to let you or anyone else use their service in a way they don't want. That's completely different than Oracle asking the government to fine Google for supposedly violating their copyright on something that is possibly not copyrightable like an API. Oracle is not alleging that Google violated a terms of service. They are alleging that Google needed a license in order to copy copyrighted material.

Google created their service and for the most part they can decide how the service is used. If someone is using their service in a way that hurts Google they are within their legal or moral rights to not provide that service in a way that hurts them. Just like as a website operator I can decide how my web server is used. I can choose to ban Google's IPs if I don't want them to access my service. I can use a robots.txt file to instruct their HTTP agent to ignore certain pages. If my website's content is copied in a way that is not covered by fair use I can ask the government to fine those who are violating my copyright but that is separate from determining what IPs may use my web server as a service. Just like Google could choose to ask the government to fine someone who violated their copyright in a way that is not covered by fair use.

Can you cite any references where Google has alleged that someone violated their copyright on a search result that you believe is covered by fair use?

"Security-By-Obscurity" - lack of users = lack of attacks. Android proves otherwise though, especially for Linux variants, where it is "king of the smartphone world", OS-wise, & is being attacked rampantly.

* So, IS it possible for Windows users to NOT see infestations?

Sure, with a bit of education & good easy to use tools to help them thru it, such as CIS Tool ( http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9018362/CIS_tool_aims_to_help_federal_agencies_check_Windows_security_settings ) &/or guides like this one I did in 2007 onwards (& I've been doing them since 1997):

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

("Layered-Security"/"Defense-in-Depth" is 'the way', & the best thing we have going vs. today's "malware-ridden-world" online... & yes, it actually works (alongside showing users who are NOT "technical computer gurus" or "security pros" some basic ideas/concepts to be aware of to help them help themselves via this concept...)

In fact, here's a quoted example of a fellow who applied it to his OWN systems, AND THOSE OF HIS CLIENTS (+ the results for over a year long period on that account):

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles, per the link above!

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"APK, thanks

See this link near it's ending (same subject title too) -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2802947&cid=39763905 (we both use the same things, lol, same way, in routers... & I put it into my DNS settings for the IP stack in Windows too, along w/ another in ScrubIT) - I've been noting it for YEARS to folks, in security guides for Windows users I've been writing since 1997 in fact:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+Secure+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

* Again though - "Great Minds Think Alike" here too, though... lol! I use "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" using those, std. stuff like firewalls/antivirus/antispyware, & of course, the custom HOSTS file I noted.

On the subject again too? However, it's NO EFFORT in building my custom HOSTS file? It's NO EFFORT... & hasn't been for me for years! I automated it long ago...

It used to be though!

(Ugh... hated it @ times, especially once it got larger around 2001 (took 4-5 yrs. but it got to be a REAL PAIN)).

See - I've been building it since early 1997, & ended up having to build 'automation' to do it around the end of 2002/early 2003 (got TOO big)

I.E.-> First, I used to use databases like Access to do the deduplication/removal of duplicate entries (This IS the part that gets "impossible" to do manually!

Once a line-record based entries file like hosts are, gets so big? It'd be impossible to finish in a whole day even!

So "SELECT * DISTINCT FROM TABLENAME" type queries were the way...

Still, I had to copy the data from sources for it, OR, find them myself (both pains, but not NEAR the pain of trying to dedup a large hosts file 'by hand/manually').

Anyhow, I started writing up an app for it, around late 2003 & I've rewritten it 5 times since then. It does the following for me in that regards - FULLY automating the process (written in Delphi XE2 64-bit Object Pascal... I even did one in Python in character mode with my nephew a year++ ago too, but I came back to Delphi):

The program's a hosts file mgt. program that does the following for end users (Calling it "APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++") written in both 32-bit & 64-bit Delphi XE2.

---

1.) Offers massively noticeable increased speed (via blocking adbanners + hardcoding users fav. sites into the hosts file for faster IP address-to-host/domain name resolutions)

2.) "Layered-Security"/"Defense-In-Depth" via blocking host-domain based attacks by KNOWN bad sites-servers that are known to do so

3.) Better 'anonymity' to an extent vs. DNSBL's or DNS request logs, as well as reliability vs. the DNS system being "dns poisoned/redirected" OR "downed" period...)

4.) Faster resolution of IP addresses for host-domain names (via hardcoding users fav. sites into hosts already ip address resolved, locally = MANY TIMES FASTER than calling out to potentially redirected/poisoned or downed DNS servers).

5.) Write protecting the hosts file every 1/2 second (supplementing UAC) - even if/when you move it from the default location via this registry entry (which if done, can function ALMOST like *NIX shadow passwords because of this program):

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\services\Tcpip\Parameters

And changing the "DataBasePath" parameter there (I do this moving it to a faster media, a "true SSD" using DDR-2 RAM, in the 4gb Gigabyte IRAM I have).

5.) Automatic downloading & Alphabetic sorting of hosts files' records entries (for easier end user mgt. manually) from 15 reliable sources (of 17 I actually use).

6.) Manual editing of all files used (hosts to import list, hosts itself in its default location of %windir%\system32\drivers\etc, the hosts files to import/download & process, & favorite sites to reverse dns

Like: http://www.bing.com/search?q=Google+%22Incorporation+of+the+Bill+of+Rights%22.&go=&qs=n&form=QBLH&filt=all&pq=google+%22incorporation+of+the+bill+of+rights%22.&sc=0-0&sp=-1&sk= ?

I believe you can set the language in the default-search-engine settings (in Chrome).

I use bing as my default search engine. I use "setmkt=en-US" to get US english Bing results, even though bing knows that I am located near Frankfurt which it shows on top-right corner.

This is my default search engine:: http://www.bing.com/search?setmkt=en-US&q=%25s

Something similar should be possible for google as well.

I guess I am some sort of Luddite. I go to the search engine page and perform my search from there. I never understand why people care what search engine the browser is set to. Do most people actually type queries in Chrome directly in the address bar (since it doesn't have a search box anymore)? To Luddites like me, that address bar is where you type a URL. You know, like http://www.google.com/ or http://bing.com./ I just tried typing a search into the address bar and it just feels "wrong".

"Nice roundup of articles, but at the end of the day anyone that uses a blanket statement like "Linux = secure" is as stupid as anyone that says Macs are virus-proof." - by Tharsman (1364603) on Friday April 20, @02:07PM (#39748269)

The articles were there to make the point with "evidences thereof" as to my statements. Especially to this statement of yours which seems to "2nd that motion::

"I know Linux server admins, and all of them take security seriously and acknowledge they are as vulnerable as any other OS if you just lay back and look at them pretty. You have to make sure they are updated, secure, and properly configured for your needs with minimal permissions granted to processes that need them." - by Tharsman (1364603) on Friday April 20, @02:07PM (#39748269)

Agreed, & they're being sensible + realistic is all, as they ought to be regarding that much.

* As far as that "sentiment" around here though, well... I've been coming around this website since 2002 (posting since 2005 pretty steadily) & it's VERY "Pro-*NIX" around here & a great deal of that type of sentiment was spread around here (Linux = secure, Windows != secure, etc./et al).

However:

Since the things I posted have been happening & especially due to ANDROID, a linux itself being so massively "hit" by attacks the past few years since it's "king of the smartphone", thus showing once any OS gains a lot of "easy meat end users"?

They're not doing nearly as much as they used to, less & less...

It wouldn't be too wise to keep that up now that things are changing for both *NIX variants in MacOSX + Linux being more used than before (iirc, Apple's around a 10% overall marketshare, & Linux is around 1%, on end-users desktops....

Which is more than both were used before - & that said?

Here comes the attacks on them more than before (since more possible potential victims exist now, it's worth writing attacks for those OS platforms now too!)

APK

P.S.=> Anything can be attacked & penentrated if not setup as securely as possible... & by default, Windows isn't setup anywhere near how it could be, such as:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

Neither is Linux (not even SeLinux bearing distros - hence WHY it was "bolted-on" by the NSA in many distros but still not as 'security-hardened' as it can be):

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22Security+Hardening+Linux%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

Hence, those guides for doing that... better than it is by default, even on SeLinux bearing distros.

Plus, certainly not MacOS X either - Not "outta-the-box"/"oem stock", for sure & because yes, they have guides for doing that, here:

http://www.apple.com/support/security/guides/

Which pretty much show anyone how it comes "by default" (which is NOT that "security-hardened").

The CIS Tool I noted that used in the link for "security-hardening" Windows, also works for Linux + MacOS X also & other *NIX variants like Solaris + more... makes it FAR easier to do in fact, & almost FUN!

... apk

"Nice roundup of articles, but at the end of the day anyone that uses a blanket statement like "Linux = secure" is as stupid as anyone that says Macs are virus-proof." - by Tharsman (1364603) on Friday April 20, @02:07PM (#39748269)

The articles were there to make the point with "evidences thereof" as to my statements. Especially to this statement of yours which seems to "2nd that motion::

"I know Linux server admins, and all of them take security seriously and acknowledge they are as vulnerable as any other OS if you just lay back and look at them pretty. You have to make sure they are updated, secure, and properly configured for your needs with minimal permissions granted to processes that need them." - by Tharsman (1364603) on Friday April 20, @02:07PM (#39748269)

Agreed, & they're being sensible + realistic is all, as they ought to be regarding that much.

* As far as that "sentiment" around here though, well... I've been coming around this website since 2002 (posting since 2005 pretty steadily) & it's VERY "Pro-*NIX" around here & a great deal of that type of sentiment was spread around here (Linux = secure, Windows != secure, etc./et al).

However:

Since the things I posted have been happening & especially due to ANDROID, a linux itself being so massively "hit" by attacks the past few years since it's "king of the smartphone", thus showing once any OS gains a lot of "easy meat end users"?

They're not doing nearly as much as they used to, less & less...

It wouldn't be too wise to keep that up now that things are changing for both *NIX variants in MacOSX + Linux being more used than before (iirc, Apple's around a 10% overall marketshare, & Linux is around 1%, on end-users desktops....

Which is more than both were used before - & that said?

Here comes the attacks on them more than before (since more possible potential victims exist now, it's worth writing attacks for those OS platforms now too!)

APK

P.S.=> Anything can be attacked & penentrated if not setup as securely as possible... & by default, Windows isn't setup anywhere near how it could be, such as:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

Neither is Linux (not even SeLinux bearing distros - hence WHY it was "bolted-on" by the NSA in many distros but still not as 'security-hardened' as it can be):

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22Security+Hardening+Linux%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

Hence, those guides for doing that... better than it is by default, even on SeLinux bearing distros.

Plus, certainly not MacOS X either - Not "outta-the-box"/"oem stock", for sure & because yes, they have guides for doing that, here:

http://www.apple.com/support/security/guides/

Which pretty much show anyone how it comes "by default" (which is NOT that "security-hardened").

The CIS Tool I noted that used in the link for "security-hardening" Windows, also works for Linux + MacOS X also & other *NIX variants like Solaris + more... makes it FAR easier to do in fact, & almost FUN!

... apk

1st: It's not science fact I was working on: More the premise & possible outcome from it, based on an analogy in film (one I like to use because it tends to have more of a "common-ground" with the common man... would you prefer I quote scripture or classical literature instead? Less people would tend to see a "common-ground" in my estimation were I to use other forms of culture/media in my estimation... that's all).

2nd: This isn't my area either. I rarely post in the 'sciences section' here in fact, but this one "piqued my interest" is all!

3rd: I am only speculating here, using that genre to make a point.

BUT, in MY area, the computer sciences? I can tell you, point-blank, that a lot of folks (including Dr. Mark Russinovich of Microsoft whom I've had some 'dealings' with good & bad in the past + doing work for the same organization/companies for, loves sci-fi too!). Largely this goes on with engineers too. Comes with the territory with geeks to love sci-fi... a lot of what WAS merely science fiction decades ago, after all, is now science-fact because of guys like myself being inspired by it.

It "goes with the territory" in my field, so "my apologies" (not) for using it...

NOW, on the Nazi scientists & what you said:

Could be, I don't doubt you! I might have named the wrong man, but I do know that guy played games on folks. Not nice ones.

Plus - It's just what I "heard tell" (that the nazi's were working on genetic engineering... even nutty stuff like using monkey testicles sewn into the skin & some folks ended up with somekind of STD infections... is it true? I don't know, you tell me perhaps)...

* HOWEVER, this tends to "bear out my statement", so take a read:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22nazi%22+and+%22genetic+engineering%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

Lot of it too!

So... that "all said & aside":

Was I a victim of "the grapevine" or misinformation? Doesn't appear that way, especially in this one:

http://creation.com/hitlers-master-race-children-haunted-by-their-past

PERTINENT QUOTE ON THE "LEBENSBORN":

"Between 1935 and 1945, there were born some 10,000 children in Germany and an estimated 9,000 in Norway as part of a Nazi genetic engineering plan to build up an Aryan âmaster-raceâ(TM) or super-breed of humanity. This scheme was known as the Lebensborn or âFountain of Lifeâ(TM) program. Special clinics were set up where SS men1 were encouraged to mate with blue-eyed, blonde Nordic girls who had no Jewish ancestry, in order to produce âracially pureâ(TM) German offspring. The resultant babies were then brought up in the foster care of dedicated Nazi couples or reared in special orphanages. There were at least ten Lebensborn homes in Germany,2 and nine in Nazi-occupied Norway, where the unmarried pregnant women could give birth in secret away from their homes.3 The babies were christened in a ritual in which an SS dagger was held over them as the mother swore allegiance to Nazi ideology.4 If any of the children born into the program were disabled, they were killed"

APK

P.S.=> There you go... apk

Somebody claimed my link didn't provide the information. (All you had to do was click on "engine problems".)

That's funny, because that is precisely what I clicked on. And you know what? You lied. No one was complaining about their warranty being voided. If you still disagree, then how about quoting the actual complaint so I can do a find on that? Because I refuse to do your work for you.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=toyota+engine+sludging

There you go again, making us do your work for you. If you can't be bothered to provide actual proof to your claims, don't be surprised when you get modded down.

Somebody claimed my link didn't provide the information. (All you had to do was click on "engine problems".)

Well here's literally dozens of links about the engines dying prematurely, and Toyota refusing the replace them (even though they were under warranty), thus becoming part of a class-action lawsuit, and being forced to reimburse customers for the ~$6000 they spent putting a new engine in a 1 or 2 year old car. http://www.bing.com/search?q=toyota+engine+sludging

"Also this is funny because show me this perfect security." - by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Sunday April 08, @09:29PM (#39615507)

For Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003/VISTA/7/Server 2008R2 setup as the default 'stand-alone' single system workstation connected to the internet?

Sure - Yes, I can by doing what's in any of these search results to-the-letter:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

After all, in principle via "layered security"/"defense-in-depth" practices for computing security in Windows is even made EASY!

(So, if you use Windows &/or Linux/Solaris (*NIX), get a copy of CIS Tool & see. It's actually almost fun, like a security benchmark test & it's massively multi-platform (a security testbenchmark, as opposed to say, ScienceMark 2.0 which is a geek CPU/Memory Performance-Oriented testing benchmark that's both 32/64-bit))

It, imo @ least, is more fun to use + run than anything anyone else puts out including MS Baseline Security Advisor which is a baseline only, keyword there.

CIS Tool gets way, Way, WAY into the nitty gritty stuff for Windows security @ the registry level & permissions levels + far more, & actually makes it fun to do. Time-consuming, but fun & you only have to do it, once.

It works on the technique of "you can't get ill from something you never were exposed to & damaged/attacked by" is why: Simplest principal there is really. "You can't get burned if you didn't go into the fire" in the first place.

There's more to it than that though, by far, as to other tools, tips/tricks/techniques that one already has with any BSD based IP stack & antivirus-antispyware tools + removal tools (std. stuff) & more, far more. If you do it yourself, I don't have to elucidate in detail, you KNOW where I am coming from.

Then, educating a user on how to make judicious decisions or exceptions for sites you need scripting on, what to download OR how to research if it's clean, & to make smart sensible surfing once learned, do the rest. Cutting off indiscriminate use of "javascript everywhere" does the rest (NoScript or Opera's options for it are examples).

* It really works, but 1/2 of it is telling people what makes them get malware infested in the 1st place so they realize what to keep away from too... "an ounce of prevention > a POUND of 'cure'".

APK

P.S.=> You asked, lol... & that was the part I omitted in my last reply to you (quoted it, but hit submit too fast) -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2773441&cid=39615913 & I like to offer complete information... apk

Ooops forgot the link (Canadian Healthcare Crisis and possible bankruptcy)

http://www.bing.com/search?q=canada+healthcare+crisis

Simple: This -> http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

(Just by using the principles of "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" AND educating users... they are the "weakest link"!)

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"APK, thanks for such a great guide. This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures. Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING! NO PROBLEMS!" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=3

"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008. Great stuff! My clien

Simple: This -> http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

(Just by using the principles of "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" AND educating users... they are the "weakest link"!)

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"APK, thanks for such a great guide. This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures. Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING! NO PROBLEMS!" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=3

"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008. Great stuff! My clien

Specifically tailored to what erroneus said's all... want to do it right? Ok:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

* It's been EXTREMELY highly rated by others online since 2008, & I've been doing the same, since 1997 onwards... &, yes, it works... & has been seen by millions, with testimonials galore, it actually works, when "FOLLOWED TO THE LETTER", exactly, point by point.

However, believe-it-or not?

Suggesting it & PROVING it was needed??

Event got me fired from a job once!

Why?? Simply, because I caught the fact my then "Head of Operations", a paper MCSE, nothing more, setup TREND MICRO antivirus wrong, & our network was RIDDLED w/ keyloggers & more... that fool!

However - Politics did me in though, because when I pointed out it's only minutes of work to migrate its settings via .reg merges & gpedit/secpol usage @ an AD network-wide level???

He tried to say "it's too much work", but I even later proved he didn't even KNOW how to do it!.

My role then was as a programmer/analyst coding for security...

By securing applications @ a DB + app level using .NET & SQLServer (migrating badly done work that was NOT using stored procs OR bind variables, & yes - you have to do THAT too, but it's useless to 'batten down the hatches' @ that level, if your entire network & OS setup is wide the "F" open!) + far more...

He got fired though!

How??

LMAO, because, some "little bird" let it out to AVG he then turned to the freebie model of that antivirus vs. his erroneously setup TREND setup, & that? IS a "NO-NO"...

"Someone", lol, took that jackass for the same ride he sent me on, but on more valid grounds... + his superior (a nearly completely computer illiterate stooge who was oddly titled "CIO") got 'taken out' too!).

What goes around, COMES around... lol. This? This is the price negligent DOLTS pay, in addition to opening the door for negligence lawsuits from clients who were compromised.

APK

P.S.=> The problem, from these mgt. DOLTS who have never really done years of ALL-AROUND work in computing (from techie, to network admin, to security AND coding) are a problem... they complained about costs or tried to?

I proved it was minutes of work, & users logons would handle the rest, domainwide, & I had a system setup thus that was NOT infested as my proof, where everyone else was diseased to hell by NOT doing it... @ both OS security & database + application levels, & for a WORLDWIDE very famous client company that had very famous folks, law enforcement, & more's data (health data no less)... apk

A "modem" is what I call a device to connect to online service. It doesn't matter if it's a dialup modem or DSL modem or cable modem or wifi modem.

My laptop is a Pentium 3 but I'm not using it. The Wifi connection I purchased for use with my Pentium 4 desktop that I brought along with me. Looks like this but with a 3 foot USB cord so I can move it around

http://www.bing.com/shopping/zoom-4411-ieee-802-11n-draft-usb-wi-fi-adapter/p/98795B354F5512A5A5CF
   

I wrote a short story called "It's hard living in Jerusalem during the winter".
Search engines, can you please help people find it?

Google: First result.
Bing: Not found - at least not in the first 250 results. Searching with quotes does help though.
DuckDuckGo: Miserable failure - even quotes don't help - and it IS supposed to use other search engines.

So either Bing and DDG suck, or they just hate me personally. Either way, I'm not going to use any of them.

For Windows, I've been writing up such guides since 1997 to present, ala -> http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH & YES, it really does work (on very common-sense principles too largely, & largely with tools ALREADY PRESENT in the OS itself).

(The originals are from 2001 -> http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text & from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml )

Yes - The same goes for Apple/MacOS X:

http://isc.sans.edu/diary.html?storyid=12616

And, yes - The same goes for Linux variants:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+Secure+Linux%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

* NONE OF THEM SHIP AS SECURED AS IS POSSIBLE "outta-the-box/oem-stock" is why... & as you can see? Folks in the community out there (like myself shown above) for years have been putting out guides for securing Windows (and the same goes for MacOS X &/or Linux too) - &, per the single example above from Apple? So do the oem's of these OS!

APK

P.S.=> The OEM's of these OS ship them that way so that "things just work right off" when you setup your machines & Operating Systems is my guess, but... it's "on you", as the end-users, to do the rest typically's all!

... apk

For Windows, I've been writing up such guides since 1997 to present, ala -> http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH & YES, it really does work (on very common-sense principles too largely, & largely with tools ALREADY PRESENT in the OS itself).

(The originals are from 2001 -> http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text & from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml )

Yes - The same goes for Apple/MacOS X:

http://isc.sans.edu/diary.html?storyid=12616

And, yes - The same goes for Linux variants:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+Secure+Linux%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH

* NONE OF THEM SHIP AS SECURED AS IS POSSIBLE "outta-the-box/oem-stock" is why... & as you can see? Folks in the community out there (like myself shown above) for years have been putting out guides for securing Windows (and the same goes for MacOS X &/or Linux too) - &, per the single example above from Apple? So do the oem's of these OS!

APK

P.S.=> The OEM's of these OS ship them that way so that "things just work right off" when you setup your machines & Operating Systems is my guess, but... it's "on you", as the end-users, to do the rest typically's all!

... apk