dadkins
Land of Confusion
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
 ·Comcast
edit:
June 8th, @11:09AM
| reply to NY22
Re: Secutiy Question
How old is your machine that a modern AV(other than Norton) is slowing it down?
Most routers do not slow down or put a load on the computer. 
Using an imaging solution is a good idea INCASE something ever does happen to the machine.
It is NOT, however, a repolacement for an AV.
Use avast! It doesn't slow any of my laptops down, not even the 5 year old AMD laptop.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
NY22
@mindspring.com
| Well why have Anti-Virus software when you have a backup? There isn't need, just a waste of RAM and hard drive space and since you asked for my comptuers configuration I've decided to post it as an attachment for those who wish to view it.
NOTE: In no way am I trying to to yell at anyone or trying to make myself sound like the almighty god of comptuers but I am giving my own POV which I think I am allowed to do. |
|
dadkins
Land of Confusion
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
edit:
June 8th, @11:55AM
| As was posted above... so YOU aren't spewing crap out to others.
So your info isn't mined and sent to - ???
I use TI myself... INCASE something ever does make it in and thrashes one of my machines.
*BUT*, I have various security in place to keep that crap off the machine to start with.
If my poor 5 year old AMD 1600+ & 512MB of RAM laptop can run without slowing down any while using avast and Outpost Pro, surely your Dell Dimension with a 2.53GHz P4 & 1GB of RAM can handle an AV!
What aren't you telling us?
BTW, You really should think about updating that machine!
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
OS Service Pack Service Pack 1
DirectX 4.08.01.0810 (DirectX 8.1)
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
NY22
@mindspring.com
| said by dadkins  :What aren't you telling us? BTW, You really should think about updating that machine! Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition OS Service Pack Service Pack 1 DirectX 4.08.01.0810 (DirectX 8.1) Yes I know, right now I'm just using this computer as a "Beta Testing" machine to try out different software and XP installation setups, trying different customizations to see what I like and don't like and what I want to tweak for this upcoming summer. Don't worry, I know about the updating and have nothing against it, despise that sometimes it opens up new wholes but I guess that's nothing new. Do you have True Image Home or another version? |
|
EGeezer
Summer is passing
Premium
join:2002-08-04
Country!
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T CallVantage
edit:
June 8th, @12:22PM
| reply to NY22
You're confusing prevention with mitigation.
A compromised computer can be re-imaged in minutes, but if the keylogger has already sent the user's logins, CCNUMS etc to the hackers, re-imaging won't roll back the transfer of the data to the hackers who will still have it despite your reload. That mitigation will take a little longer than eight minutes.
If a spambot has sent out a few thousand child porn spams, the emails will still have been sent out from your PC, even if you reimage.
If someone uses your system for things that violate your ISP's TOS and you are shut off by the ISP, it may take more than eight minutes to resolve that issue.
If someone uses your system for illegal activities that are traced back to you through your ISP, you may spend more than eight minutes convincing someone that you weren't the culprit, or that you didn't willfully cooperate with the culprit.
Reimage doesn't mitigate the effects of the breach, but only removes the tools used for it. So, as I said, you've gotten your responses and have simply reworded your earlier theories. Again, if you still feel you don't need what's recommended, put your money where your mouth is and try it.
--
The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy: neither its pipes or its theories will hold water.
|
|
The Snowman
Premium
join:2007-05-20
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to NY22
One of the computers I use on the internet is less than 1/4 the size of your machine an it zips right along without so much as blinking.....plus. it can withstand any normal attack sent against it.......and its fully loaded with security.........the problem is not your machine...the problem is you and your lack of knowledge on how to tweak a computer to enhance the system.
Furthmore....you do not appear to be even slightly concerned that your computer may infect others or be used to attack others or used perhaps for illegal purposes........such an immature and totally selfish attitude will catch up to you oneday.....and when it does I hope you remember this post you made.
So if you want to continue having the attitude of an immature child thats your choice. But there is a hard world out there that someday you will have to deal with....an it wont show you any mercy.....just as you are not showing any mercy to those you may infect or attack. |
|
javaMan
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-15
San Luis Obispo, CA
| reply to NY22
said by NY22 :
. . .
NOTE: In no way am I trying to to yell at anyone or trying to make myself sound like the almighty god of comptuers but I am giving my own POV which I think I am allowed to do.
Noted, and you are certainly allowed to express your point of view. But others are pointing out (and have on more than one occasion apparently) that your logic is flawed. And if you would allow yourself, I think you would see it. You have made a couple of assumptions that are incorrect; one being that any security at all will "slow down" your computer. While it's true that certain products, an AV for example, can affect performance--mostly boot time--you would need to prove beyond a simple statement of fact that firewalls or routers significantly affect computer performance and by implication, personal productivity. I don't think you can produce any tests results that would convince even the casual observer of this.
I bring up personal productivity because what you propose has indeed been tested. Machines exposed as you describe are infected in minutes, not hours or days, but minutes. Ask yourself then if you are better off with overhead of a few milliseconds caused by a router or whether you would rather spend most of your time creating and restoring backup images?
You know, many theories can appear to be sound until they are exposed to the realities.
--
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness. . . Isa. 5:20 |
|
