Neowin.net

Incompatibe? I thought that the very "nice" FF is compatible with everything so far

Only software can be "incompatible" with websites. Websites are said to "not support" browsers.

SP1 is the most UNSAFE thing on earth? What about XP Gold, or the 9X series?

Really? Is that why I haven't recieved a single piece of malware or virus in over 8 months running XP SP1 with no firewall or anti virus programs?

SP2 is garbage and you don't need updates to keep your computer secure if you know what you're doing.

ANova you are absolutely wrong. there are a good many worms that require no user interaction other than connecting to the internet. you dont have to click, download, or even see the virus for it to automatically download into a vulnerable port while it randomly selects IP addresses and infect your machine.

sigh, they still exist

Yeah smartass, 8 months. I don't need to explain myself any further.

Buzzblade, I'm behind a hardware firewall and all my ports are blocked.

Really? 'casus when your first posted, you said that you WEREN'T behind a firewall.
So which is it?

Actually, they said they weren't using any firewall or anti-virus programs... "programs" being the operative word, though I can see how you might assume that "firewall" was a self-contained statement.

My head just exploded.



I have not had a single problem with it. Apparently YOU don't know what you're doing.

I agree; I've been running SP2 as soon as it appeared; I'd love to know what evidence the original poster (who you replied to) has against SP2.

And the comment: "you don't need updates to keep your computer secure if you know what you're doing." - how f*cking stupid; now we know who the ones are, who are spreading virus, works and DOS attacks on the web; sparmy little smart asses who think that they're some how immune to stuff.

ps: software compatibility; thats an issue for your software vendor to address, not Microsoft; the information pertaining to the changes in SP2 have been known for well over 2 years, its their fault that they chose to ignore the 1.5mb document that was put up on the Microsoft website.

Quote - ANova
Really? Is that why I haven't recieved a single piece of malware or virus in over 8 months running XP SP1 with no firewall or anti virus programs?


Given that you are actually behind a firewall, despite what youve said, this means you have a secure network, not necessarally a secure OS. Put that same OS on an insecure network, or on a large college campus network, even if the network is behind a firewall, and you would get owned. Or connect it to an open Wifi access point at an airport with a laptop etc. There are many people that do this, and they need an OS which is secure. With a decent, secure, OS, theres no reason they shouldn't be able to.

Hell, a vanilla install of Win95 is "secure" when not connected to the internet, or behind a serious firewall. Thats a pretty stupid statement to make. You arent actually exposing the OS to the internet or insecure network.

Ok neowin lugheads, here's a little lesson.

Most viruses attack through stupidity on the part of the user, visiting questionable websites, opening files they got through the email from someone whom they do not know. Most of the self downloading and installing kind do so through insecure browsers. Do not open these files and use a secure browser like Opera and your chances of getting infected go down tremendously. Sure if someone knows your ip they could try to hack your system but how often does this occur for a single home user? The answer is very rarely, you have to bring attention to yourself or challenge someone. If you block your ports they will fail at that as well; no need for soiling yourself over a new exploit found in windows or scampering to install all updates at all times and relying on Microsoft.

As far as why I don't like SP2, I have my reasons. In many cases it slows down XP and/or produces problems with programs like IE and explorer resulting in inconsistant and odd behavior. My Dell work computer has SP2 loaded on it and I can see first hand the differences between it and my personal computer with SP1. Installing XP clean with SP2 already integrated helps but installing SP2 over an installation results in a bungled mess. No thanks.

True, you can blame the user for a lot of stuff. Yet, if someone who isn't as obviously clued-up as you happens to be on a network with the same configuration as yours, they'll get owned the first time they click a link in an email, simply because they haven't got anything stopping viruses on the system.


Which just goes to show how much you know about networking and connectivity. The <insert port number> exploits require neither user interaction or a browser. I accidentally left the external network cable attached when I rebuilt a XP (bald, not slipstreamed) machine and got Blaster before I could apply SP2 from NAS.
Deleted for irrelevancy.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. All those botnets out there know your IP address, they probably just haven't got around to it yet (in the last 12 mins). There's nothing personal about it in the first instance.
Fantastic advice. Don't forget to block port 80 so the HTTP vector is removed. And make sure 127.0.0.1 is denied access just to be on the safe side.

Yes, but what has that got to do with Firefox users that already have XP SP2 being told that they need to upgrade to it? Read the article next time.

yeah well prehaps IE sucks balls because its slow and full of spyware and adware when browsing the net!

I hate those pop ups and ads!