[Site Home] [Forum Home] [Articles] [File DB] [News Archives]
Networks/Telecom/Security -> Bagle toasts Windows firewall
(View original topic)
| Red Squirrel - Nov-07-2004 server time |
| Yeah I find even 2k is way faster then XP so I'm sure 2k3 is even faster. I have hundreds of installed programs, I never defrag (I always want to do it before bed but forget all the time) and often I'll be surfing the web while intensive stuff is going on such as large file transfers. If I'm doing something super intense it will sometimes lock up for a few seconds, but that's about it. What I find odd is how XP gets so much publicity compared to win2K, like the SP2 was as if doom 3 was coming out or something, while 4 service packs for win2k got released with no news about it. Perhaps it's all this publicity that makes it more targetted to attacks. |
| sintekk - Nov-07-2004 server time | ||||
Windows firewall, like you said, is better than nothing. Should be more than enough for the grandpas and grandmas just wanting to check their email. I never said I disliked XP (or at least I don't remember saying it  )As for Windows 2003, the XP crap is disabled by default. And for being only server flavor, it's not too hard to disable the server elements and re-enable the graphics and sound acceleration and so on: http://www.msfn.org/win2k3/ Benchmarks on my computer (dual booted) showed that 2003 is faster than XP, and most of what I read shows that too. |
| Red Squirrel - Nov-07-2004 server time |
| Yeah unfortunatly MS is going towards the XP stuff with long horn, and to make things worse putting the DMCA in it, so it won't be possible to use an alternative browser for example, since it won't let you install stuff not certified. And why would MS certify other browsers? Or other office suites? The DMCA is an effort for MS to monopolize the market even more and basically drive everyone out of business. A little help from the goverment is what it takes. But hopefully there will be a better standardization in linux in terms of install/uninstall of software, which would make linux usable for most people. Now installing stuff in linux is a PIA and is a very tedious process, so it's not good enough for desktop use yet. But the time will come I'm sure. Though you can tweak server 2003 to be better as a workstation, so that's the good news. |
| jryan - Nov-07-2004 server time | ||
| Windows Firewall -> Not perfect, but better than nothing if you don't have a firewall installed. (ex: Windows 2000 by default has no protection.) A little backgrounder (seeing as how many discussions tend to be anti-XP on this forum): Windows XP is based on the 'best of both worlds' so to speak. It's core is based on Windows 2000, which was an improvement of NT. It also has the ease of use elements from the 9x based systems. Sure we have some problems with it, and sure there are some of you that won't use it... but realize folks, from here on out we're stuck with it. Windows 2000 is going to be 5 years old this year with 4 service packs under it's belt, wheras XP is three years old with only 2 service packs. I'd call that an improvement. (And ya can't tell me there's been way more updates, because Windows 2000 pre-SP1 and pre-updates doesn't even support 128-bit encryption in IE). Might I remind everyone that there's a new OS coming out.. something along the codename of Longhorn. It's going to have XP-elements. As far as Windows 2003... I'm glad someone brought that up.
Got ya, Red! Windows 2003 is currently only availible in a server flavor and here's the real interesting part. Builds on Windows 2000 but has an XP interface built in. Sorry about the rant, guys, but it gets on my nerve when you all talk baised against XP. Yes, we all have our favorites, but the stability and reliability all depends on your usage habits with your operating system. For example, I had a quite stable Windows ME install.. now I have a very stable XP Install on my laptop and desktop. Red's 2000 install is quite stable, however I'm sure he remembers the days where we were formatting Windows 98 machines every other week. Try to stay somewhat objective. |
| Red Squirrel - Nov-06-2004 server time |
| Yeah I heard it's pretty decent. |
| sintekk - Nov-06-2004 server time |
| Windows 2003 is better performance- and security-wise to 2000 |
| Red Squirrel - Nov-06-2004 server time |
| Yeah but at least win2k is safe to use. It's the only good OS microsoft ever made. By default it's VERY unsafe, since it shares ALL your partitions with full access to everyone, but XP probably does the same too, not to mention RPC. (Remote Personal compromization) |
| Andy - Nov-06-2004 server time |
| LOL you OWNED window's CRAP SOFTWARE. |
| Red Squirrel - Nov-06-2004 server time |
Windows Firewall®: The only firewall in history to make your computer less safe.™ |
| Andy - Nov-06-2004 server time |
LOL that don't apply to me I run without firewall for the reasons of server software to run windstorm  |
| Red Squirrel - Nov-06-2004 server time | ||
http://software.silicon.com/security/0,390...39125482,00.htm
W32/Bagle-AU attempts to terminate the following processes: alogserv.exe APVXDWIN.EXE ATUPDATER.EXE ATUPDATER.EXE AUPDATE.EXE AUTODOWN.EXE AUTOTRACE.EXE AUTOUPDATE.EXE Avconsol.exe AVENGINE.EXE AVPUPD.EXE Avsynmgr.exe AVWUPD32.EXE AVXQUAR.EXE AVXQUAR.EXE bawindo.exe blackd.exe ccApp.exe ccEvtMgr.exe ccProxy.exe ccPxySvc.exe CFIAUDIT.EXE DefWatch.exe DRWEBUPW.EXE ESCANH95.EXE ESCANHNT.EXE FIREWALL.EXE FrameworkService.exe ICSSUPPNT.EXE ICSUPP95.EXE LUALL.EXE LUCOMS~1.EXE mcagent.exe mcshield.exe MCUPDATE.EXE mcvsescn.exe mcvsrte.exe mcvsshld.exe navapsvc.exe navapsvc.exe navapsvc.exe navapw32.exe NISUM.EXE nopdb.exe NPROTECT.EXE NPROTECT.EXE NUPGRADE.EXE NUPGRADE.EXE OUTPOST.EXE PavFires.exe pavProxy.exe pavsrv50.exe Rtvscan.exe RuLaunch.exe SAVScan.exe SHSTAT.EXE SNDSrvc.exe symlcsvc.exe UPDATE.EXE UpdaterUI.exe |
(Showing 50 last posts, newest on top)