Francisco Tapia
fhtapia at gmail.com
Sun Sep 18 18:09:40 CDT 2011
Another thing you can attempt is to setup a Linux virtual machine that would prevent hackers from reaching your personal data directly. I really won't surf the net on Internet explorer (any version). I only use Firefox with noscript and on a Linux machine helps to obfuscate as much direct contact as possible... Sent from my mobile On Sep 18, 2011, at 1:25 PM, Alan Lawhon <lawhonac at hiwaay.net> wrote: > Mark: > > I have a hardware router, (the "Zoom X5" Model 5654 ADSL supplied by my > ISP), AVG Internet Security, (including AVG firewall and all the other > features that come with the AVG Internet Security Suite), along with > AnteSpam email filtering provided by my ISP. (I don't know this for sure, > but I think there might be a hardware firewall implemented in my router > which blocks any "bad stuff" before it gets to my browser. If that's the > case, then I actually have two [separate] firewalls protecting me.) I also > have automatic updates enabled for Windows Update. (I suppose all this > makes me very "security conscious" with my PC.) In addition, I'm very > careful about downloading "ActiveX" components - most of the time I refuse > them when I'm prompted. Not sure if that's "smart" or not, but I'm being > ultra cautious about downloads. > > I recall getting some type of virus from an email attachment that I > foolishly clicked on many years ago. Getting that virus (or whatever it > was) was a nightmare getting off of my system. That experience greatly > intensified my security awareness. > > I have gone ahead and changed my Hosts file to read only. With all the > other security I have implemented, setting the Hosts file to RO may be > overkill, but the harder I make it for a hacker to get into my computer, the > better. I hope the odds of me being the victim of a hacker are [at least] > 99:1 against. > > Alan C. Lawhon > > -----Original Message----- > From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Mark Breen > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 10:19 AM > To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server > Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Windows Secrets: The Sorry Tale of the > (un)Secure Sockets Layer > > Hello Stuart > > Is this your command on your shortcut > > C:\Windows\system32\notepad.exe C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts > > Me too. > > Hello Alan, > > you could do that, but my opinion is that if someone gets to your hosts file > and wants to change it you have so many problems that your hosts file being > RO is not going to make a difference anyway. I would suggest instead to run > like hell. > > Mark > > > On 17 September 2011 22:18, Stuart McLachlan <stuart at lexacorp.com.pg> wrote: > >> As a general rule, an RO hosts file makes sense. Very few people ever need >> special entries >> in it. >> >> OTOH, I have a shortcut to mine in a folder on my desktop because I edit > it >> quite often, >> >> -- >> Stuart >> >> On 17 Sep 2011 at 10:39, Alan Lawhon wrote: >> >>> >>> http://windowssecrets.com/top-story/the-sorry-tale-of-the-unsecure-soc >>> kets-l ayer/ >>> >>> http://tinyurl.com/3z9awxj >>> >>> >>> >>> This is a follow-up article to the story concerning corrupted root >>> certificates which I posted last week. Microsoft issued an >>> out-of-cycle security patch to eliminate the source of the phony >>> certificates, (i.e. DigiNotar), and remove the threat to users of >>> Internet Explorer and other browsers. >>> >>> Since > than 99 percent of the potential "victims" of this security >>> breach were located over in Iran, Woody Leonhard seems to be implying >>> that this may be a case of the Government of Iran eavesdropping on its >>> citizens; thus there is little (if any) chance of this breach >>> adversely affecting users outside of Iran - like us. Still, his >>> analysis of the "lax process" by which root certificates are issued is >>> illuminating. >>> >>> At the end of his article, Woody recommends that users consider >>> modifying their "Hosts" file (to read only) in order to "lock" their >>> system and prevent man-in-the-middle attacks and other >>> security-related vulnerabilities. Before I modify a system file, I >>> want to check with the experts on here. Are most of you in agreement >>> that changing your "Hosts" file (to read only) is a good idea? (I >>> wonder why Microsoft doesn't make the "Hosts" file read only by >>> default?) >>> >>> Alan C. Lawhon >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> dba-SQLServer mailing list >>> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com >>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver >>> http://www.databaseadvisors.com >>> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dba-SQLServer mailing list >> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com >> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver >> http://www.databaseadvisors.com >> >> > _______________________________________________ > dba-SQLServer mailing list > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver > http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > dba-SQLServer mailing list > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver > http://www.databaseadvisors.com >