One of the "news" websites (
www.abcnews.com
maybe?) had a nice list of
"things you can do to protect yourself from email viruses", and I thought
it was very interesting that "avoid M$ products!!!" wasn't on the list.
Well no MS is a workable solution but when you have to have some
compatability MS can work if (and only IF) applied with some care.
Think about it, who NEEDS IE5.0? Who needs instantmessaging, Chat, VBS,
Active-x controls? WHY????
I run NT4.0 sp4/workstation, It's ok and security if you make the effort
is good, not VMS but nothing like w9x. I even got two copies of loveletter
and all I had to do in outlook express was delete it. Sure I also have
auto-open disabled too, thats good sense. I use office97 at work, never
install Outlook, it's fat and slow most users never use all the features.
Even those of us that run or like OS<mumble> know that the latest and
greatest is least safe. That even applies to VMS... some of us remember
VMS5.x--> Security patch -4H.
It's too bad the net has turned into such an
appliance. In the old days,
each site often implemented their own TCP/IP stack and SMTP/FTP/etc. servers
from scratch, so even if they had security flaws they weren't well-known.
security by obscurity. Ok but the growth would be severely crippled and
interoperability worse.
in a fake version banner in his wu.ftpd just so the
crackers would be more
likely to leave him alone, worth a shot!
the key here is not what was done but, that something was done at all, not
hanging out a sign that says hit me. How many sites even read up on how
to secure linux, freeBSD, or NT?
No I'm not a MS lover <hate it for many reasons> but don't blame the cow
for soggy cereal. MS is only part of the problem by not addressing known
holes. The users that install the carpet bombed AOL disks and install teh
latest widgets deserve the blame too for what they get.
Allison