Hi guys,

I was wondering if a Windows XP PC equipped with service pack 2 and antivirus is secure enough for a tech-literate user? For someone who knows what viruses are and comes from.

Reason is these latest updates makes Windows XP crawl.

A good antivirus software ( eg. Norton) and Windows Defender ( with real-time protection turned on ) will do. But make sure it's always updated. Also, turn on the firewall and don't simply open the attachment in the email.

SP2 + AV is a doom to fail mixture. WHY?

1. Without updates, you will be susceptible to worms that infiltrate into your computer via Vulnerabilities. You will have Sasser and Blaster partying in your computer.

2. These days, Malware Like Spyware, Trojans etc are the Famous culprits, not Viruses. Without anti-malware Programs, you survive?

3. No Firewall. Hackers love that. I doubt you do, do you?

Hopefully, what I mention should be able to remind you of aspects that needs to be taken into deep consideration. Cheers!

you are talking about tech literate or illiterate?

points #1 and #2 are not an issue as long as you know how to use your system. i don't worry about them as i don't install random softwares. and i don't open any thing i receive either.

#3 haha. well you try get a hacker to hack into my Firewall Disabled systems and see.

it boils down to usage, whether you actually put yourself at risk.

anyway of course updates, AV and firewall are better for noobies isn't it.

Disagree. LOL. I can't which is which, but Either Sasser OR Blaster was swimming in the Internet, affecting computers like Virus in the Air. You don't need to do anything. Just have an unpatched Computer Online, 9 out of 10 times, you will have a visitor.

Cheers!

depends la. i tried before. if i direct PC with Modem without patch - yeah sure kena.

that time was after re-format. i just go online to get some stuff. wah get hit a lot.

however if you're behind another level or few or devices (in my case, a router) then you don't get those things.

unless the fella use Port 80 to kacau me la. LOL. cos port 80 redirected to my machine.

anyway i don't disagree with what you posted. those are best practises, i'm just saying that even without doing so it COULD be avoided if you know how to go about.

That's the trick. LOL. A router. I don't have a router, so I am in fact very vulnerable if I don't do what i preach.

However, if people are behind a router, safe to be like goldfries. ONLY if you pratice SAFE Surfing. Cheers!

Thanks for the replies. The PC is behind a NAT/router so it's tougher for the hackers. Currently testing SP2 + Antivir antivirus + Spyware Blaster (updated) and will do a weekly scan to see if any those suckers could get it

hehe. not necessarily.

you must be aware of what comes in and goes out of your network too.

you can protect all you want - but all it takes is 1 PC with all those crap inside and they could just do a port scan on all available PCs and do their dirty job.

when you're on a router, you're safe from outside attacks as such but you're still a possible target.

another way is 1 of the PC users downloaded crappy stuff with trojan / malware and run it. then the PC gets infected. the attack goes through the router as a file and after installation, attacks from within.

that's why i said what you mentioned are BEST PRACTICES.

^ Just wait till you kena something big

I'm honored. LOL.

But why I kept posting on this issue, only one reason:-

Tech-literacy is not a important as tech-weary. Best practices are in fact a necessity, IMO. One less infected computer = One less BOT = One less case in Tech Support (Or other Malware Support Forums). Obviously, being tech-literate, this should be in the requirements

Anyway, nice insight on the Router thing. I am on Modem, so, I wouldn't know it better than those with it. Cheers to you goldfries and all!

the quick answer is "no, winXP sp2 is not secure enough" with antivirus. a firewall is more important because it blocks stuff before stuff enters your system. i've seen PCs with popular antivirus programs disabled by trojan/virus. of course, the final factor is user behaviour, software alone is never enuf.

as for updates/patches for XP: i never install any patch unless it absolutely fixes something i'm using. eg. if a patch fixes IE "vulnerability" and i don't use IE *ever* then forget the patch. SP2 patch is just too d@mn big and do you know what all them KB282828s are for? do you really want to know? if you read it from microsoft website the "details" are not informative enuf.

and the Automatic Patching service? no, thank you!

Worst advice in the whole group of recompiled advices.

DO YOU KNOW THAT:-
IE is part of the OS? Even though you don't touch IE, Windows itself needs IE to run certain programs/processes/modules etc?

DO YOU KNOW THAT:-
An unpatched IE is just as BAD as an unpatched Windows?

Go think it over before talking.

IF you are using "ahem" Windows, find the patches yourself AND exclude the Patch that says something like "Windows Genuine Advantage". Other than that, your computer should run a breeze.

I will not pursue any further. Cheers!

Duh

Now, I didn't see this coming.

What are you hinting? Cheers!

worst advice? well,for your information my PC are basically PATCHLESS since day 1 and i've never ever have any trouble of any sort with it. why did IBM rejected SP2 when it came out?

so windows "needs" IE? why? when? or is that just a line from somewhere?

"An unpatched IE is just as BAD as an unpatched Windows?"
nonsense. windows is "BAD" (if you want to use the word 'BAD') with or without patches - period. but seriously folks don't get your panties in a twist over "patches", you can live without them quite safely - i'm the proof of concept =). IBM reject SP2 when it came out?

you would think ALL patches are somethings "useful" for you. then by all means patch it. have you seen your add and remove programs list of gazillion patches? do you know what they do? what they are at a glance?

and look at all those holes. give you that certain s i n k i n g feeling?

all i am suggesting, not advice, take em or shove them, is if you use/manage a good firewall, antivirus, anti-anything on your PC, and throw aside IE, OE, WMP, MSmessenger, your patches are optional unless A patch actually fix A problem you are already seeing.

cheers =)

I will not dispute over this sentence, but, you don't have to be that crude to get your point over


Pity. I don't seem them. You know why? Because I remove the Patch Uninstallers.

Frankly, I don't think you are aware of certain inner workings of Windows. No offense. Let me clear the dust.

Have you read Help files before? Those with the *.chm extension. They are called Compiled Help Files (Metafiles or so). How do they work? They are in fact Webpages that have been compiled with a compiler. And WORST of all, they use IE to run.

What's the fuss then? The fuss is, certain Help Files Goes Online, to get updated info, or graphics. OR Worst still, to download files through invisible iFrames or so. Imagine an Unpatched IE Surfing. No doubt, Your firewall will make noise like "HH.EXE is attempting to connect to the internet" "Compiled Help File Reader is attempting to connect to Trusted Zone" etc. You block. Happy. But, certain vulnerabilities like unseeable iFrames are damn unseeable. Period.

I patch because I have gotten 5 Trojans, 5 Backdoors knocking my computer during 98 days. And while I was still using my faithful 98, XP was out for 3 years already. You telling me that Patches only are important for legacy systems like 98? Cheer-up.

Fine. You might be a proof of concept. In fact, I do find your case to be unexpectedly fascinating, or in my own view, highly lucky.

But then, patching when you see a problem might not be a good idea either. Why wait until it breaks when you know you can cover it?

No offense. Issue of conflict of views. I respect your view. No doubt. Cheers!

P.S. What is OE?? LOL

EDIT: TYPO

This post has been edited by natakaasd: Mar 11 2007, 10:15 AM

if you remove them it makes your situation unknown, coz now you don't know what you have or haven't installed - not from the add or remove. don't know about you, i rather know what is in than keeping it mysterious.

i know all that...thats why i don't use windows HELP, if i want to read the ms official "KB" i go for it directly. and go google for third-party forums and you'll find more readable, clearer explanation. ms websites are b0rked-frames anyways.

Ah! trojans are your-own-faults things. did you download cracks? did you use IE to browse and OE to read mail? if you had a firewall on in the first place the trojans would have blocked/alerted by the fw. i wonder if anyone collect data on how many PC IE "helped" to infect worldwide? i only patch MS Servers and server-related programs such as MSSQL and because applications specify that as requirements.

not at all. careful is the word. and no, i don't think my "case" is fascinating either. it is just simple. not a single infection for a very long time.

"if it ain't broke, don't fix it." anyways, i've seen many PCs with patches with many virus/trojans on the same PCs at the same time.

sure, different ppl have diff ideas.

Outlook Express.

=)

I lol-ed at this statement.