From: louise on
Anyone using the Online Armor firewall? At the moment I'm
using the free version, wondering if there's really any
reason to move to the paid version. What has your
experience been?

Also running NOD32 and various Spyware programs on a
regular, but not realtime, basis. Usually use Firefox with
NoScript - but I do need to use Outlook.

Louise
From: Sebastian G. on
louise wrote:

> Anyone using the Online Armor firewall? At the moment I'm
> using the free version, wondering if there's really any
> reason to move to the paid version. What has your
> experience been?


Sorry, the paid version also includes known vulnerabilities that the vendor
is unwilling to fix.

> but I do need to use Outlook.

Then why are you even discussing about security?
From: louise on
Sebastian G. wrote:
> louise wrote:
>
>> Anyone using the Online Armor firewall? At the moment I'm using the
>> free version, wondering if there's really any reason to move to the
>> paid version. What has your experience been?
>
>
> Sorry, the paid version also includes known vulnerabilities that the
> vendor is unwilling to fix.
>
>> but I do need to use Outlook.
>
> Then why are you even discussing about security?

Perhaps I manage to run my machine more successfully than you.

I have been running Outlook since it came into existence and
I have never had my system crash from malware or an
infection. I generally use safe hex, I use a good spam
filter which works with Outlook and the only crashes I've
had is the occasional hard drive failure. And yes, I've had
backups.

I can discuss security even though I run a program known for
vulnerabilities - and if you can't - then you can't talk to
most of the population - why are you even reading this
newsgroup?

Louise
From: louise on
Straight Talk wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 23:50:09 -0500, louise <louise(a)invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Anyone using the Online Armor firewall? At the moment I'm
>> using the free version, wondering if there's really any
>> reason to move to the paid version.
>
> There's always the reason of wasting some money. I'm just wondering
> what reason you've found for even using the free one. Please
> elaborate.
>
>> Also running NOD32 and various Spyware programs on a
>> regular, but not realtime, basis.
>
> Bad. Realtime is the only thing that at least provides *some*
> protection. Scanning for malware is nonsense. BTW, malware of any kind
> is mainly a user-introduced problem.
>
>> Usually use Firefox with
>> NoScript -
>
> Not so bad.
>
>> but I do need to use Outlook.
>
> Not so good.

It alerts me when processes run, when programs have changed
etc. - with an NAT router, it seems to provide some added
protection, perhaps it's not necessary.

The new version of NOD32 presents itself as AV and
AntiSpyware but most think the spyware component is weak.

I can't run SAS because they can't create an interface that
adjusts to customized font sizes on windows and I can't ever
see the controls to use them because the interface is
incomplete. This has been going on since its inception and
I've contacted Nick a few times. He recognizes the problem
but has not fixed the coding.

I am confused. Many on this ng seem What real time
anti'spyware would you recommend - something that doesn't
eat resources?

Thanks.

Louise
From: Sebastian G. on
louise wrote:

> Sebastian G. wrote:
>> louise wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone using the Online Armor firewall? At the moment I'm using the
>>> free version, wondering if there's really any reason to move to the
>>> paid version. What has your experience been?
>>
>> Sorry, the paid version also includes known vulnerabilities that the
>> vendor is unwilling to fix.
>>
>>> but I do need to use Outlook.
>> Then why are you even discussing about security?
>
> Perhaps I manage to run my machine more successfully than you.


Bullshit. The most reasonable assumption in this case is that your system is
compromised.

> I have been running Outlook since it came into existence and
> I have never had my system crash from malware or an
> infection.


Which doesn't mean anything, since malware does intend to hide.

> I generally use safe hex,


Which is mutually exclusive with using Outlook.

> I can discuss security even though I run a program known for
> vulnerabilities - and if you can't - then you can't talk to
> most of the population - why are you even reading this
> newsgroup?


Well, you may discuss, but it's useless. As long as one unavoidable trivial
attack vector exists, it's no use securing any other part of the system -
the attacker will simply use this attack vector.