Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

the definitive minimal amount of programs for the greatest security?

<< < (5/6) > >>

mob:
Yeah... backups are definitely good.

You'd think I would learn after 3 hard drive crashes and 2 lightning surges... I guess it's either i'm lazy or I just like playing my luck  ;)

Oh well, I always say nothing is going to happen to me... then the next day it happens.

It's just an accident waiting to happen. Although now I am a little smarter and backup some of my important files onto dvds (just incase).

But yeah, I don't think I'll ever see the day when I do a full system backup.

I do a fresh windows installation ever 2-3 months and start from scratch anyways...

About your question, nudone: I've never used Microsoft's AntiSpy but I've heard it was a good piece of software. As far as you comparing it to Process Guard... two totally different things.

And I agree with your point about a user needing to be some-what advanced in order to use the security apps. You can give a newbie the best security a computer can have and he will still get hit with the baddies. The point is... having the tool is not enough to get the job done. You need to know how to use it.

I just removed 994 trojans from my brothers PC... yeah... you read that right.... he's one of them :huh:

Scott:
You definitley need process guard.

The only programs I use to protect my system is Process Guard and Outpost Firewall and COMMON SENSE!! <--- this is important!

I do use TDS-3 as my trojan scanner. I will perform a scan once a week and maybe once in a year I will detect some trojan than got passed my defenses. TDS-3 is by far the best trojan scanner available... hands down.

As far as a virus scanner... I wouldn't use one. I don't use them because they hog resources and plus I don't really see the benefit of having one. Remember, as long as you have common sense, you don't need one.-mob (April 09, 2005, 08:23 PM)
--- End quote ---

OK, I'm confused by your position.  You "definitely need process guard" because, ostensibly, you realize that you can come across malware.  But you say that you don't need anti-virus software, because you use common sense.  This brings to mind a few questions:

1.  Why does "common sense" remove the need for anti-virus software, but not ProcessGuard?

2.  Why does "common sense" remove the need for anti-virus software, but not anti-trojan software?  (Keeping in mind that there really is no such thing as literal "anti-virus software" anymore)

3.  How does "common sense" detect malware?
 

Scott:
OK, I'll shed some light.  There is no One True Answer for security.  There is no One True Security Utility.

What you need depends on a lot of things.  Who uses your computer.  What you have on your computer.  How knowledgable you are.  How much money you have.  How willing and able you are to deal with software and environment configuration.  What you do with your computer.  How it is connected to the internet.  And so on and on and on...

Anyone giving a flat, specific, parrot-like answer to the question of "what do I need?" really doesn't understand security at all.  I'm sorry, but it's true.  If you don't even pause to ask some of the questions above, and more, how can you possibly provide a reasoned answer?

If someone asked, "How do I secure my building?"  wouldn't you ask things like "Is it a dwelling, or a storage space?"  "How is the building constructed?"  "What is inside it, and how valuable is it?"  "Where is the building located?"  "How much can you spend on security?"

...?

mouser:
well,

i agree that there is no one answer for everyone, in all fairness the spirit of this site has been trying to make these kind of generalizations about what would be a good setup, so i wouldnt be so hard on an attempt to suggest a good minimal set of recommended apps, and just say that people should take such suggestions with a grain of salt.

its interesting to see that some firewalls are adding the kind of functionality that process guard adds, and im guessing that the functionality of something like process guard is a good idea and could make it into operating systems in the future.

ie you should have some better control of what executable processes run.  but for me process guard is a bit too much.

Scott:
Sorry, I have to disagree to an extent.  Maybe I worded it too harshly...  Sorry.  But a "good setup" for one person will be a terrible setup for another.  For example, I might recommend Jetico Personal Firewall and NOD32 to you, because they both have significant strengths, but may involve some complex configuration--but I'd never recommend either to my mother (I'd be over the following day, doing a reformat).  Instead, for her, it might be ZoneAlarm and Kaspersky Anti-Virus.  But...  Is her CPU up to the task?  More questions.

Sure, you can sit back and say "A good anti-virus and firewall makes a good setup", but that's pretty much a non-statement these days, just as twenty years ago we could've had a long discussion on the merits of wearing your seat belt while driving, but today, it pretty much goes without saying.

The OP said "how about trying to define the minimum number of programs that are required for a thoroughly secure system"...  If you want a number, I'll say, OK, how about 4?  Maybe 3.  No, definitely 5.  But what does "thoroughly secure" mean?  (To me, it means the system is unplugged.)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page