[pchelpers] Re: Zone Alarm

Hi Robert,

Friday, September 26, 2003, 10:32:01 AM, you wrote:

RM>       I will agree with you to a point.  It is not NEEDED.  But a lot of
RM> people enjoy it and so they will 'buy' it.  Name of the game! Same reason
RM> we buy cars with all the electronics on them then it is not needed.  And as
RM> has been brought out, over 90% of the virus, ect. are of the variety that is
RM> given first to the AV people, kind of like a 'look at what I did" thing.

RM> I have been using Microsoft OS since 3.1 and have been using Outlook express
RM> since its inception even in our business situation, with occasionally going
RM> with some of the others to try them out.  I LIKE Outlook Express and I
RM> always have the preview on. Now saying this, I have never gotten a virus or
RM> worm in my computer.  Could I?  Perhaps.  But in the meantime I enjoy what I
RM> have  (and I keep everything up to date!)

RM> We should mention that All computers are susceptible to virus and worms.
RM> OS2, MAC, UNIX.  Just a lot of publicity when it hits Windows, usually
RM> because it is a associated with a person and because is the one used by most
RM> of the home users.

Yes, I was ranting, as usual, in that last message. And I do make a
living from Microsoft, so I really can't complain too loudly.
Nevertheless, RTF can do most of what HTML does, without the security
holes (but is only available when Outlook is connected to an Exchange
server). As long as you don't mind losing scripting, accessing files
(images or web bugs) on websites, etc., all of which, first, are
problematical from a security viewpoint, and second, are rarely used
in legit emails (although web images are often used in commercial
emails).

The problem with various panes that some people talk about is that
scripts only run when the email is actually opened up in its' own
window; they apparently don't run in the preview pane. Some HTML
loopholes are active even in the preview pane, though.

As for Linux bugs, check this article from 2 weeks ago:

http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=40256

"Linux Still Less Secure Than Windows
   "On the flip side of the coin, I should point out that Linux still
suffers from far more security bugs and other vulnerabilities than
Windows does. Researchers at mi2g Intelligence Unit, which has been
tracking and verifying computer-based vulnerabilities since 1995, say
that in August 67 percent of all successful and verifiable attacks
against servers targeted Linux, compared with just 23.2 percent that
targeted Windows--and August was the month during which SoBig.F and
MSBlaster hit. Furthermore, 12,892 e-business sites running Linux were
successfully breached during that month, compared with just 4626 sites
running Windows. Windows vulnerabilities get more press because more
people run Windows on the desktop, so any Windows-based worms or
viruses will generally affect a far larger group of individuals. But
anyone who thinks that jumping to Linux is a cure-all should think
again. Even if you don't consider the usage numbers, everyone's
favorite open-source poster boy is still a huge target for attackers."

--Scott.

Regards, John Durham (list moderator) <http://modecideas.com/contact.html?sig>
Freelists login at http://www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi
List archives at http://www.freelists.org/archives/pchelpers
PC-HELPERS list subscribe/unsub at http://modecideas.com/discuss.htm?sig
Good advice is like good paint- it only works if applied.

Other related posts: