Jump to content
MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. ×

The Windows 98 Challenge


TheJackal
 Share

Recommended Posts

Kaspersky may be a good AV but 98 can be secured very well without it, or any other AV for that matter.
I am using Kaspersky only as an on-demand scanner, mainly for checking eMule software downloads, not for securing Win98. About 10% of eMule software downloads are infected, so a top AV is essential.

The Internet is the principal source of malware. The major reason for using Win98 with new hardware is its limited malware/spyware/etc vulnerability in the Internet.

So I stick to my crystal ball, which says that Win98 will be dying when there are no more new Win98 browser versions OR when there is no more anti-virus support under Win98.

Whenever there will be no more anti-virus support under Win98, the task of on-demand scans of internet downloads could be done under another opsys (e.g. WinXP, Linux). This is not convenient, but it could be done. The task of burning CDs/DVDs, for example, I have moved from Win98 to WinXP, because the burn-quality (and longevity of the CDs/DVDs) under WinXP is much superior. As a multi-booter, I am using the opsys best fitted to the respective task.

Edited by Multibooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I am using Kaspersky only as an on-demand scanner, mainly for checking eMule software downloads, not for securing Win98. About 10% of eMule software downloads are infected, so a top AV is essential.

Nearly 100% of the software one can download on eMule is illegal isnt'it ?

I have moved from Win98 to WinXP, because the burn-quality (and longevity of the CDs/DVDs) under WinXP is much superior.

I am willing to learn stuff but you'll have to elaborate on that one in depth to make me swallow it.

:hello:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nearly 100% of the software one can download on eMule is illegal isnt'it?
Except for the trojans :thumbup
The task of burning CDs/DVDs, for example, I have moved from Win98 to WinXP, because the burn-quality (and longevity of the CDs/DVDs) under WinXP is much superior.
I am willing to learn stuff but you'll have to elaborate on that one in depth to make me swallow it.
Just try to burn 2 identical DVDs with Nero v6.6 (the last Win98 version), one under Win98, the other under WinXP. Then run Nero CD-DVD Speed. Disk Quality Test: The DVD burnt under WinXP will most likely have a better/higher score than the one burnt under Win98.

By the way, I am currently archiving my old software CDs (about 200) dating back to 1994 - onto USB HDD!! Don't trust plastic, about 20% of the old CDs would have been unreadable by most current CD/DVD-burners! I am lucky to own a LiteOn SOHR-5239V, a CD-burner with exceptional error correction, and was able to recover about 99.95% of the old softwares, with the help of Beyond Compare [it doesn't stop copying after the first bad file, and you can easily repeat the copying attempt of individual bad files]; Windex ammonia-based glass cleaner also helped in a few instances.

Edited by Multibooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am using Kaspersky only as an on-demand scanner, mainly for checking eMule software downloads, not for securing Win98. About 10% of eMule software downloads are infected, so a top AV is essential.

I usually use Shareaza for the Gnutella networks, with about the same infected results. Used to have 3 separate AVs installed just for manual scanning. I eventually opted to use VirusTotal for scanning smaller files. With files that are too large to upload there, I run them on a system I built just for malware testing. I don't install anything on my primary unit without running it on that testbox first. I used to do a lot of testing with live malware. P2P was one of my best sources for test material.

The Internet is the principal source of malware. The major reason for using Win98 with new hardware is its limited malware/spyware/etc vulnerability in the Internet.

That's one of many good reasons for staying with 98. I wish I had newer hardware to put my 98 system on. Some day, I'll get to experience that luxury. Until then, I'll enjoy the fact that 98 gives me a secure and viable system on old hardware over which Microsoft, Big Brother, etc have no control.

IMO, another of the best reasons for using 98 is its simplicity, which makes it ideal for all kinds of experiments, many of which would be impossible with an NT system.

Just try to burn 2 identical DVDs with Nero v6.6 (the last Win98 version), one under Win98, the other under WinXP. Then run Nero CD-DVD Speed. Disk Quality Test: The DVD burnt under WinXP will most likely have a better/higher score than the one burnt under Win98.

I'd question if that's more of an issue with Nero than with what version of Windows is being used. I'd have to see this repeated with multiple PCs, multiple brands/models of burners, and several different burning programs, each combo tested with both operating systems to accept that as fact. I only have a CDRW, but with 98FE and BurnAtOnce, I've never burnt a coaster and haven't had a CD fail in the last 4+ years. Maybe I've been lucky, but I've never had to try to recover data from a bad CD.

The end of Win98 will come when ........ Opera will not provide an updated browser for Win98.

Whether it's Opera, SeaMonkey, or whatever, I'll agree that it's preferable to run an up to date browser, but it's not a necessity. Quite often, updated versions are released to fix newly found vulnerabilities. Most don't add anything new for the user or to improve compatibility with web content. If the browser connects through a filtering app like Proxomitron, it can often be used to filter out code that contains the exploit. IMO, by using good content filtering like Proxomitron and proper configuration, a user can run older browsers with very little real risk.

Rick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, another of the best reasons for using 98 is its simplicity, which makes it ideal for all kinds of experiments, many of which would be impossible with an NT system.
If you install WinXP on a FAT32 partition, you can even virus check WinXP while under Win98.
I'd question if that's more of an issue with Nero than with what version of Windows is being used. I'd have to see this repeated with multiple PCs, multiple brands/models of burners, and several different burning programs, each combo tested with both operating systems to accept that as fact.
Of the whole Nero software-accumulation I only use Nero Burning ROM & the standalone Nero CD-DVD Speed, and I am quite satisfied with Nero. For rare special burns I use (under Win98) old ClonyXXL v2.0.0.6/CloneCD v5.2.1.1 (e.g. Oxford English Dictionary v3.0) and old Alcohol 120% v1.95 (build 2802), both can co-exist with Nero.
I only have a CDRW, but with 98FE and BurnAtOnce, I've never burnt a coaster and haven't had a CD fail in the last 4+ years. Maybe I've been lucky, but I've never had to try to recover data from a bad CD.
The burn quality of Win98 vs WinXP differs substantially for DVDs, less so for CDs, maybe under Win98 4GB are harder on the cache than 700MB. When Nero CD-DVD Speed indicates a DVD burn quality of less than 95, I throw it out as a coaster, my target is 97-99%, I use Japanese DVDs (Panasonic, taiyo yuden). A DVD displaying a quality of 95 shortly after the burn, usually will have deteriorated to a quality around 75 after 12 months, etc. On one of the older CDs (10+ years) which I recently archived, after successful archiving with repeated read-attempts & cleaning, a flake of the golden layer had just fallen off, producing a CD with a small hole in the golden layer to look thru :whistle: I have seen quite a few old gold CDs where the golden layer had fallen off at the outside rim, but maybe ammonia-based Windex was too strong (I have seen Windex only in the US, not in Europe)
Whether it's Opera, SeaMonkey, or whatever, I'll agree that it's preferable to run an up to date browser, but it's not a necessity. Quite often, updated versions are released to fix newly found vulnerabilities.
My concern about outdated browsers is less the security aspect. My major concern is that some websites (often those where money transactions are involved) don't work properly with older browsers. Under Win98 www.youtube.com/user/CSPAN for example displays Ok with IE6, but nothing is displayed when you use IE5.5, even if Flash Player 9.0.124.0 (!!) is installed Edited by Multibooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Eidenk:

Win98 is not valid or the best solution for some new apps (DVD burning, film downloads, etc).

If that is your case the best for you is multi-boot your system, and use Win2000 or XP for the occasions in which you can't sort out the problem using Win98.

Not only you will have the security of enjoying that new apps. You increase your overall security because you gain the possibility of using each system to backup/restore from scratch the other one. The procedure, which I recover and correct from an older post of mine, is as follows:

1 .- Assuming that you have Windows 98 already working, if you want to use also XP (not for 2000) divide your HD into less than 32 GB logical units and format all them as FAT32 (backup everything first). I use for this Partition Manager, not only to create the units but also to format them. You must have a main partition as active and the rest of the HD as extended partition, creating into it so many logical units as needed. In the case that the computer doesn't boot afterwards from DOS use fdisk (freeware, valid for big HD) from A: with the commands fdisk /mbr and sys a: c:, so that the HD starts to work.

2 .- After installing W2000 or XP, Program Files is shared with Win98. There are also the new folders Documents and Settings, and Windows directory. Mind that there's a new My Documents, this time into Documents and Settings!

3 .- Once fully installed the new OS it is convenient to introduce in autoexec.bat the following lines:

deltree c: \ recycled> Nul

deltree d: \ recycled> Nul

deltree e: \ recycled> Nul ... (as many times as logical drives).

This is to avoid problems with the trash bin.

4 .- Using Win98 go to Tools> Folder Options, and choose "Show all files and all extensions".

5 .- Create a folder on a different drive unit, and even better also on an external HD, and copy to it all C:\root files (excepting pagefile.sys), Documents and Settings and the new Windows folder. In another folder we copy also the old Windows (excepting the .swp file). For increased security it is convenient to have also all Program Files and My Documents copied somewhere else, and even better on an external HD.

6 .- In the future, to restore any of both OS you only need to boot the other one, delete the problematic OS and restore the corresponding saved copies. Mind not erasing anything of any of both systems while using the other! :whistle:

HTH

Edited by cannie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just try to burn 2 identical DVDs with Nero v6.6 (the last Win98 version)
Not true. I run Nero 7.0.0.0 on Win98SE without a problem and the last known version working on 9x would be 7.2.7.0 which was still availble from Ahead's page some time ago (haven't checked lately).

As for CD/DVD burning quality, first thing would be to use quality blanks, not any cheap stuff. My first CD dates around year 2000 and is also manufactured Tayio Yuden (branded TDK). It still reads fine.

Most of my optical media (CD/DVD) are branded TDK, but recently some of the DVDs checked with DVD Identifier reveal that they're manufactured by Moser Baer India; previously they were marked as TDK Corp.

Honestly I don't trust them much, but it's gonna be time to tell their quality on a long term. However, out of my old disks, I only had problems with one of them, where the reflective layer has a flaw as mentioned by Multibooter in post #20. And they were almost all burnt in Win98SE with a Teac CD burner and lately with my Samsung (TSST Corp) SH-S182D DVD burner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not true. I run Nero 7.0.0.0 on Win98SE without a problem and the last known version working on 9x would be 7.2.7.0 which was still availble from Ahead's page some time ago (haven't checked lately).
Thanks for the correction. Somehow I was under the erroneous assumption that Nero 7 didn't support Win98 anymore. Here the download link for the trial version for Win98: http://www.nero.com/eng/downloads-nero7-98me.php

Do you know why there is this comment in parentheses?

"LAST - $$$$ - Nero Burning ROM 7.2.7 (6 offers greater stability)"

http://www.msfn.org/board/Last-Versions-of...98-t105936.html

As for CD/DVD burning quality, first thing would be to use quality blanks, not any cheap stuff. My first CD dates around year 2000 and is also manufactured Tayio Yuden (branded TDK). It still reads fine.
Taiyo Yuden CDs & DVDs are top.

In my previous posting #20 I mentioned archiving my old software CDs, and they were quite old (1994-1996, i.e. 12-14 years), somewhat older than your first CDs (8 years). Before archiving, I ran a CD quality test on the first batch of 18 (avg.age: 13 years) with Nero CD-DVD Speed v4.7.7.15, producing the following interesting results:

1 CD had an unrecovered read error

4 CDs had a quality rating of 0, with a C2 total between 94 and 1454

13 CDs had the following quality ratings: 74,76,80,84, 87,88,89,91,92,93,2x94,97 giving an avg of 88

The best CD had Q=97, C1 avg= 1.20, C1 max=20, C1 total=5226

These were all golden CDs by TDK, Mitsui & 1 bad Kodak. They were stored at room temperature, except for 3 summers in an attic with temperatures reaching 40-45 Centigrade. The golden CDs were part of the Fate series, burnt by Numbers, so probably with the best burn quality possible in those days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know why there is this comment in parentheses?

"LAST - $$$$ - Nero Burning ROM 7.2.7 (6 offers greater stability)"

No, I have no idea. If there were any details supporting the affirmation...

Personally I haven't run a thorough optical media check on my entire collection so I couldn't offer any numbers but on a random review when I needed some old file, I haven't had any noticeable problems.

That first CD of mine has a backed-up Win95 on it together with Office 97 and I've been running it pretty intensely at the time, learning how to install and configure an OS while also swapping motherboards and performing all kinds of testing. Once I manage to build a rig dedicated to DOS games (see the Ultimate DOS Gaming Boot Disk thread) I'll test some of the other old disks too.

Some are Gold series, some are Metal series. Somewhere I should have a statistics of disks/manufacturers that needs updated; I may post it at some point if it's not in violation of any rules here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I run SeaMonkey on most every OS I use with good results. The cookie manager works quite well. In its earlier days when it was the Mozilla suite, there were some types of popups it didn't catch, but that's been fixed long ago. SeaMonkey is very easy to configure. IMO, the preferences are much better organized.

Everyone here is pretty savvy so I don't see why IE should be proving problematic.

Even when IE6 is tightened up and secured as well as it can be, it still has one major problem. Anything that compromises IE also compromises the OS, because IE is part of the OS. That integration is Windows biggest security problem because it exposes the OS to the internet.

I have to agree that using an alternate browser is the easiest way to prevent most of the internet garbage from getting into your OS. It's been a repeating story, sites that rip IE6 apart can be visited with an alternate browser with no problems. Only one of the OS I use has Internet Explorer installed. The only way it's allowed to connect to the web is through Proxomitron.

Rick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I run SeaMonkey on most every OS I use with good results. The cookie manager works quite well. In its earlier days when it was the Mozilla suite, there were some types of popups it didn't catch, but that's been fixed long ago. SeaMonkey is very easy to configure. IMO, the preferences are much better organized.

True, they are better organized. All I want from cookie management is blocking of third-party cookies. Too many sites use unnecessary first party cookies but I can live with that. There is an obvious selection in configuration that says "Accept cookies from originating site only" so I selected it. In this current session I've acquired a cookie from Twitter and I've only visited MSFN. GRC is currently doing testing on cookie related problems and the test there shows all avenues for cookies are open! Try this link http://grc.com/cookies/forensics.htm.

Initially I thought the popup blocking was ok until I closed the browser one day and found a big "pop-under" so that system is flawed as well.

Everyone here is pretty savvy so I don't see why IE should be proving problematic.

Even when IE6 is tightened up and secured as well as it can be, it still has one major problem. Anything that compromises IE also compromises the OS, because IE is part of the OS. That integration is Windows biggest security problem because it exposes the OS to the internet.

I have to agree that using an alternate browser is the easiest way to prevent most of the internet garbage from getting into your OS. It's been a repeating story, sites that rip IE6 apart can be visited with an alternate browser with no problems. Only one of the OS I use has Internet Explorer installed. The only way it's allowed to connect to the web is through Proxomitron.

Rick

I've tried IE6 sp1 (2 different installs) and it spat the dummy on some sites that are important to me. Sent that one to the bit bucket. IE 5.5 sp2 has no problems on those same sites. The big danger with IE (all versions) is active-x and allowing it to be downloaded from web sites. Pages can download nothing! If a web master develops a site needing some control that is not already part of the OS then he/she is in the wrong business. Scripting and active-x are also turned off for all but selected sites. The zone system allows me to have 3 levels of security. The internet zone is water tight. Nothing but plain html and css. The restricted zone allows a little bit extra like cookies and scripting. Trusted zone allows some active-x as well. A kit of tools I got from M$ allows me to quickly add sites to the restricted or trusted zones.

I can't understand anyone surfing the net without a (big) hosts file. In Australia, most people have down load (and upload) limits so I don't want half a dozen banner ads etc. for every page I visit.

Based on what I read on the Seamonkey web site, I don't think the suite is going to be of much use to us as 9X users for much longer. They are planning major changes which amount to a Major rewrite that is very likely to break 9X compatibility.

I've just found a new Linux live cd so I think I may use that for my web surfing in future. I still like 9x for my development work better than anything I've tried.

Have a nice day,

Sweet William.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even when IE6 is tightened up and secured as well as it can be, it still has one major problem.
Is IE 5.5 any better?

Do you have a version of IE6 which is definitively pre-Sebt.2001? I only have v6.0.2600.0000IC which (according to my personal download notes) I downloaded from MS on 20-Sebbt.2001

"Internet Explorer 6.0 was released on August 27, 2001"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even when IE6 is tightened up and secured as well as it can be, it still has one major problem.
Is IE 5.5 any better?

Do you have a version of IE6 which is definitively pre-Sebt.2001? I only have v6.0.2600.0000IC which (according to my personal download notes) I downloaded from MS on 20-Sebbt.2001

"Internet Explorer 6.0 was released on August 27, 2001"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer

I'm curious. What is the significance of IE6 pre or post Sept 2001?

Sweet William

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...