herbalist Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 Here's links to VirusTotal results for those 2 files. http://www.virustotal.com/analisis/c9df38a...be66ff7642fe9achttp://www.virustotal.com/analisis/c4edcd5...c961e732a09596eI understand your concerns about 9/11 and the effect of the resulting paranoia on software. I share it. I don't doubt that it did affect certain types of software, especially encryption software and the OSs themselves, but I doubt that it would have led to the weakening or compromising of firewalls, at least not in 2003. Today, it might be another story. I don't doubt that 9/11 is one of the factors in the push to make 9X systems obsolete. Both big money and the powers that be don't like the user having that much control and the final say over the OS. If I were equipping a PC based solely on suspicions about the aftermath of 9/11, my primary concern would be the OS itself and the dates of the patches/updates. This is one of several reasons I stay with 98. I'd completely avoid security apps/suites made by the big US companies and choose single purpose programs from small vendors and individuals, from overseas whenever possible. I'd heavily favor Open Source. Even if one assumes that the powers that be want a backdoor into every PC, I wouldn't expect them to target security apps or user software. It would involve too many apps and too many people, resulting in a much greater risk of it being discovered. Such a backdoor would be put in the OS itself.IMO, restricting your choices to pre-9/11 software takes away too many good choices and would leave you with a system that's not very useful. How would you open the newer document formats or the newer types of media? I wouldn't want to browse the internet with a pre-9/11 browser either. I understand where you're coming from, but there's only so much you can do. You can monitor the traffic in and out of your system. You can monitor all the changes an app makes to your system. You can regularly check the integrity of your system. You can implement a security policy that won't let anything happen without your approval. You can attack your system with every piece of malware you can find and visit every malicious page on the net. Eventually, you have to trust the software you use and the security package you've set up. With Kerio for instance, I've tested it every way I know how. I've monitored it as much as my old equipment will allow. It has never done anything I'd consider suspicious. Yes, it has some limitations and some weaknesses. Show me a firewall or security app that doesn't. I trust it, but not to the point of expecting it to stand alone. It's part of my security package, a package I trust. The security arguments against using 98 don't hold up. Contrary to what MS and the big security software vendors would have you believe, 98 can be made just as secure as XP or more so, and at little or no cost. Everything needed to secure a 9X system is freely available. The older firewalls are ideal for 9X systems. Out of the newer ones that will run on 9X systems, most are too heavy and contain "features" that are useless on 9X systems. Other security apps that work very well on 98 are Proxomitron and the free version of System Safety Monitor. Proxomitron is the web content filter around. In the hands of a user with knowledge of web content, it's very powerful. System Safety Monitor allows the user to decide what processes are allowed and what each is allowed to do. It's the most powerful whitelisting tool available for 98 that I know of. When combined with a rule based firewall like Kerio, these 3 make an almost bulletproof package. They're all very light. If they have a disadvantage, it's that they require the user to have a fair amount of knowledge to configure them well. While most of the members here are more than knowledgeable enough to handle them, they're generally too much for the typical user. For me, computer security is almost an obsession. Those 3 apps, combined with batch files give me the control I want without slowing down my system or using up my resources. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Multibooter Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 If I were equipping a PC based solely on suspicions about the aftermath of 9/11, my primary concern would be the OS itself and the dates of the patches/updates. This is one of several reasons I stay with 98. I'd completely avoid security apps/suites made by the big US companies and choose single purpose programs from small vendors and individuals, from overseas whenever possible. I'd heavily favor Open Source. Even if one assumes that the powers that be want a backdoor into every PC... Such a backdoor would be put in the OS itself.Very well expressed. It was already revealed in 1999 that "special access codes prepared by the US National Security Agency have been secretly built into Windows" http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/5/5263/1.html People at the Moscow Institute of Technology in Dolgoprudny were saying in 1997 that the raison-d'être of PTS-DOS was that you "cannot have an American operating system in Russian tanks."IE 6.0 was released on Aug.27, 2001. Microsoft was very vulnerable at that time, "The DOJ announced on September 6, 2001 that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead seek a lesser antitrust penalty. On November 2, 2001, [52 days after 9/11] the DOJ reached an agreement with Microsoft to settle the case." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._MicrosoftMy suspicion is that the problem of the sluggish deletes covered in the forum under http://www.msfn.org/board/98-FE-98-SP1-98-...fix-t84451.html may have something to do with it, together with the Active Desktop introduced in IE 5.5 SP2.IMO, restricting your choices to pre-9/11 software takes away too many good choices and would leave you with a system that's not very useful. How would you open the newer document formats or the newer types of media? I wouldn't want to browse the internet with a pre-9/11 browser either.I am currently setting up a fresh Win98 system and have decided to install only IE 5.5 SP1, released on Nov.4, 2000, together with the latest Opera (preferred, from Norway) and FireFox.IE 5.5 is sufficient for wireless cards with WPA encryption, even Adobe Flash Player ActiveX v9.0.115 can be installed with a trick (Adobe's last supported version for IE 5.5 is Flash Player 8). I came across a few rare nasties when using IE 5.5: Adobe's website crashes IE 5.5 when going to http://www.adobe.com/go/EN_US-H-GET-FLASH; CSPAN at http://www.youtube.com/user/CSPAN doesn't show anything, possibly because of some server-side exclusion of IE 5.5, otherwise no major browsing problems with IE 5.5. De facto, however, I have decided to give up IE for the sake of a better working, and a hopefully more secure, Win98. In any case, my principal use of IE was only as one alternative for printing tricky-to-print web pages. And Opera and Firefox will hopefully improve their printing.Thanks for your long and interesting posting. I'll continue with my reply tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vick1111 Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 (edited) THIS WAS POSTED BY MISTAKE UNDER THE WRONG TOPIC.SOMEONE CAN DELETE THIS? Edited May 27, 2008 by vick1111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halohalo Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 (edited) Virus and Spyware Scanners + Privacy and Security ToolsAbout Lavasoft Ad-Aware SE Personal 1.06r1, it seems that the def file is no longer compatible with Win9x since SE1R247 update.GamesThe US official server of PHANTASY STAR ONLINE Blue Burst (dx9.0b, OLG) was shut down since April, but the JP official server remains online. http://psobb.jp/ Edited May 27, 2008 by halohalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philco Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 (edited) Virus and Spyware Scanners + Privacy and Security ToolsAbout Lavasoft Ad-Aware SE Personal 1.06r1, it seems that the def file is no longer compatible with Win9x since SE1R247 update....Ad-Aware Professional 1.06r1 running properly only on winXP... stupid... On win98 (i try copy last defs.ref) error. My last properly version SE1R246. Please, post for me (rapidshare.com, uloz.to or any) def SE1R247 (last compatible def files) - info: Forum Ad-AwareOtherwise it's going to be Spybot SD and good bye to Lavasoft? Edited May 28, 2008 by Philco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halohalo Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 On win98 (i try copy last defs.ref) error. My last properly version SE1R246. Please, post for me (rapidshare.com, uloz.to or any) def SE1R247 (last compatible def files) - info: Forum Ad-AwareOtherwise it's going to be Spybot SD and good bye to Lavasoft? AFAIK, the last compatible def file for most users should be SE1R246, only few users claim SE1R247 works on Win9x/ME.http://www.lavasoftsupport.com/index.php?showtopic=18145I found a backup of def SE1R246, but I don't have def SE1R247. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Multibooter Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 With Kerio for instance, I've tested it every way I know how. I've monitored it as much as my old equipment will allow. It has never done anything I'd consider suspicious... I trust itDr Octagon reported about the transmissions by Tiny v2.0.15 to a Polish server http://board.protecus.de/t22085.htm , and recommended Kerio v2.1.5 instead.But Kerio v2.1.5 is the next software version of Tiny v2.0.15A. There are 2 versions of Tiny 2.0.15: an initial one (without the A) released on Oct.12, 2001, 30 days after 9/11, and a final one ("A version") released 10 days later on Oct 22, 2001. Somebody paranoid might hear voices: "You've got 30 days..." In my experience the second-to-the-last version of a piece of software is often the best version, the last version often contains lots of issues/bugs, which nobody cared to resolve anymore.Other security apps that work very well on 98 are Proxomitron and the free version of System Safety Monitor. Proxomitron is the web content filter around. In the hands of a user with knowledge of web content, it's very powerful. System Safety Monitor allows the user to decide what processes are allowed and what each is allowed to do. It's the most powerful whitelisting tool available for 98 that I know of. When combined with a rule based firewall like Kerio, these 3 make an almost bulletproof package.Which versions of Proxomitron and System Safety Monitor can you recommend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroOS Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 (edited) Interesting with Ad-Aware SE defs sizes...Jan 28: 2406 KB (works)Feb 18: 2506 KB (works)May 09: 3106 KB (works)May 12: 3228 KB (broken)May 29: 3543 KB (broken)There seems to have been a big jump in defs size after R246 (May 9)...Here is the SE1R246 defs file:http://www.divshare.com/download/6106475-87f (3.09 MiB)Enjoy! Edited December 17, 2008 by RetroOS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbalist Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 I'm using version 2.0.8.583 of System Safety Monitor. Very stable on 98 thru XP. Haven't had the time to test their latest one, 585. The last time I tried 584, it had major problems (BSODs). Don't know if it's been fixed. With Proxomitron, version 45J is the last and the one most people use. The filter sets that come with it aren't bad. There's several other filter sets available, some still actively maintained. More on them here.Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbalist Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 (edited) Regarding Foxit Reader, 2.3 versions.Earlier I stated that the latest versions worked fine with 98fe\se. At the time, I was using version 2.2, which works fine on both FE and SE. Today I found I was several versions behind and installed the latest version. On 98FE, the 2.3 versions use a large amount of memory that increases as you scroll thru the pages of the document. Memory usage info was obtained with Memuse memory and swap file monitor. By the time I'd moved thru 25 pages, over 90% of my memory had been used up. My 98SE testbox is a fresh install of 98lite, not yet completed. Version 2.3 of Foxit did worse here. My memory usage was 14% at bootup. By the time I'd scrolled 18 pages, my memory was 98% consumed. On my 98 boxes, all of the 2.3 versions of Foxit have severe memory usage issues. Versions 2.2 and older work fine on both 98FE and SE.Rick Edited May 31, 2008 by herbalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven W Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 (edited) Noticed this thread and decided to add one of my faves:http://www.artweaver.de/I'm sure that 0.5.1 worked, haven't tested 0.5.2, but fairly certain it will still work Edited June 3, 2008 by Steven W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven W Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 (edited) How could I forget this one:http://www.photoscape.org/My friends have so much fun adding quote balloons to pics from their digital cameras.Hehe. Just noticed it's my two-year anniversary! Edited June 3, 2008 by Steven W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroOS Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Regarding Foxit Reader, 2.3 versions....On my 98 boxes, all of the 2.3 versions of Foxit have severe memory usage issues. Versions 2.2 and older work fine on both 98FE and SE....I installed Foxit Reader 2.3 on my 98SE box... Not good.Massive resource drain to the point that after scrolling the first page or so of a PDF, the screen stops updating even though the scroll bar is moving...I've rolled back to 2.2 that works okay - higher resource requirements than Adobe Reader 6, but so much faster to display.I did notice though, that the display in 2.3 was much nicer than 2.2...I've got all the free Foxit extras added and also gdiplus.dll to improve the display quality... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbalist Posted June 15, 2008 Share Posted June 15, 2008 One more for the list. I can't believe I forgot this one. It was a lifesaver when I had dialup. Star Downloader, a download manager, free and pro versions available. Not sure if it's still being developed. If you have an unreliable internet service, it's a gem. Handles all types and sizes of files. I downloaded a 660MB ISO with the free version on dialup over a 2 week period. Built in scheduler. Drag and drop. Pause and resume, hours or days later. Multiple download categories with their own destination folders. AV integration. Switchable browser integration. Too many features to list. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drugwash Posted June 16, 2008 Share Posted June 16, 2008 Is it any better than FlashGet that can work as BT and eD2k client too, besides being a classic HTTP/FTP download manager? I've been using FG for as long as I've known the Internet and had very little issues with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now