Safe to take XP without any SPs online?


Recommended Posts

I have an old copy of Windows XP that I am about to install, it doesn't even have SP1 on it.

I remember hearing that it is very dangerous to take an outdated copy of XP online without protection, that it will become infected within moments without even surfing to a single website, is this true? Should I install antivirus and firewalls before connecting the system online? I remember hearing that sometimes XP needs to install some small updates before installing an SP, is this true, or can I install XP offline, then download SP3 from another PC and install that offline without any problems?

What method would you recommend I do? (Other than slipstreaming)

download sp3 offline install, put it on a disk or a usb drive or something. install xp without an internet connection, install sp3 after xp is done installing then take it online. It will take mere moments for xp to get infected

From what I found out SP3 won't install unless you have at least SP1a installed. So you will need to download SP1a or SP2 as well as SP3 to get it fully service packed. You can safely install the OS, it won't get compromised in a mater of minutes even if just sitting there online long as you are behind a firewall and don't browse anywhere. Just download the SP1a or SP2 and SP3 network installs on another PC and copy them over anyway you want to.

first thing i think... get the installers for SP1 and SP3 and install them. as far as i know, you can skip SP2. install them offline (burn to CD), then put on an antivirus program of choice. then get online and do Windows Updates. it will save you alot of time and keep the outdated system off the internet till it is at least somewhat up to date.

You won't ge infected sitting on an idle conenction can you?

If the network (may be directly to the Internet, or even any other local network) has any machine infected with worms, there is a high probability that you will get infected. Windows XP pre-SP2 doesn't even have the firewall on by default. If you turn the firewall on manually, you will be a bit more safer.

If the network (may be directly to the Internet, or even any other local network) has any machine infected with worms, there is a high probability that you will get infected. Windows XP pre-SP2 doesn't even have the firewall on by default. If you turn the firewall on manually, you will be a bit more safer.

Well if he has another machine on the local network that is infected that's a whole other issue. Point is if no machine on the local network is infected he's fine long as he doesn't really go anywhere, to be honest he could go to the Microsoft website on the XP non-SP install and grap the SP files that way as well and still be safe..

Can you install SP2 then 3?? Since SP1 / SP1a is a bit hard to find now (its no longer on the MS site - well the small file is, the network install isnt)). As someone has already said, you need SP1 or 2 (altho I dont know if SP2 works without SP1), before you install SP3

Can you install SP2 then 3?? Since SP1 / SP1a is a bit hard to find now (its no longer on the MS site - well the small file is, the network install isnt)). As someone has already said, you need SP1 or 2 (altho I dont know if SP2 works without SP1), before you install SP3

You can install SP2 without SP1 or SP1a being installed, then install SP3 after SP2 is installed.

The issue with XP pre-SP2 was that the firewall didn't activate at the same time as the network connection, so there was a delay between network-on and firewall-on. This left a window of opportunity for the IP scanning worms to get in.

If you have a NAT router or firewall (any off-the-shelf router will do), then you will be safe to connect and make a visit to Windows Update.

I don't know if it still applies now, but I don't think it's just a case of FUD.

When worms such as Blaster etc. were prevalent you could be infected without doing anything.

I remember once when I just reformatted as I was about to download SP2 immediately, bam, I received the Windows will shutdown in 60 seconds message.

But I believe if you have Windows Firewall enabled at the time when you configure your internet connection, you should be rather safe.

I know this is gonna sound dodgy.. But if you have a genuine licence key then download XP SP3 integrated version from somewhere and use your key. But again be very careful and make sure that the one you download/borrow is clean version.

I don't know if it still applies now, but I don't think it's just a case of FUD.

When worms such as Blaster etc. were prevalent you could be infected without doing anything.

I remember once when I just reformatted as I was about to download SP2 immediately, bam, I received the Windows will shutdown in 60 seconds message.

But I believe if you have Windows Firewall enabled at the time when you configure your internet connection, you should be rather safe.

To avoid the blaster issue- you could offline go into services.msc (typed at the run) look for the Remote Procedural Call - then under the properties set the do not reboot option upon errors- (that used to be the way before a fix was applied) to allow you to stay online without it booting you offline until you could get SP1. I used to have a XP Gold around here until I slipstreamed service pack 1. Also setting the do not reboot upon erros in the system tab. As well as turning on the windows firewall.

But personally I would not trust a XP machine unless it had Service Pack 2 installed ... or Service pack 1 with a decent firewall.

If you go on the normal sites like Yahoo!, Google, MSN, things that big you will be fine. Don't search for sites and click on links you don't know.

No you can't get a virus from having an idle computer running. That's BS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaster_%28computer_worm%29

get your facts straight buddy :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaster_%28computer_worm%29

get your facts straight buddy :rolleyes:

Get your facts straight. How do you get a virus from websites that are perfectly safe (the big ones: Yahoo!, Google, MSN)? If you don't visit any website that is shady then you can run the system idle while running Windows Update to update your PC.

My comment "No you can't get a virus from having an idle computer running. That's BS.", was meant towards running the PC and updating it while connected to the internet. Not visiting thousands of websites that are shady and then leaving it idle.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!