JorgeA Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Hello,I just came across this good word that cybersecurity researcher Steve Gibson put in for Windows 98 --98 is old, but solid, and isn't prone to being affected now. I really do believe older code is better code than new code. However, it's got to be old code that you leave alone, that you don't keep messing with. And so XP continues to be brought forward because Microsoft's supporting it, and features that are being added in Vista and Windows 7 are still being backported into XP, which is destabilizing it.Been making my way slowly through Gibson's "Security Now!" podcasts, and just tonight I heard this one from 2009.Thought you'd like to know. A number of folks on this forum have made a somewhat similar case for Win98.--JorgeA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScrewUpgrading Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 That's great news! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaclaz Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I just came across this good word that cybersecurity researcher Steve Gibson put in for Windows 98 --Just for the record, be aware that the reputation of Steve Gibson is not unanimously considered as that of a good cybersecurity researcher, though he usually has some good points, he tends to make them sound like "the ultimate truth" or "the absolute truth" and, more generally to over-emphasize anything he happens to find (or think he has found).http://attrition.org/errata/charlatan/steve_gibson/The "old code" is better is " old news", sometimes it is true, sometimes it is not.The general point is that no hacker (unless a hacker -ethical or not - does it for the fun of it) will lose his/her time on finding security exploits on systems that are used by a very little number of people and that - generally speaking, of course no offence intended - hold no meaningful/valuable data.You could also say that the best thing MS did for security was to push XP and later Vista :ph34r:/7, thus drawing attention away from 9x/Me systems, thus making them more secure in practice if not in theory..... jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JorgeA Posted July 27, 2011 Author Share Posted July 27, 2011 jaclaz,I am indeed aware (thanks mostly to you ) that Steve Gibson is not universally admired. But when I look at the website you linked to, I note that they have one single thing to complain about him in the last five years. Considering the amount of material Gibson puts out, I would say that's a pretty good record.Over the years I have seen various critiques of his work, and I am not impressed. The fact that most of those anti-Gibson websites have bit the dust (like the "GRC Sucks" one referenced in your link) should tell us something.None of this means that I take whatever Steve Gibson says as gospel. As of late 2009 (as far as I've gotten in his "Security Now!" series), he still wasn't using antivirus software, and that's not a road I am prepared to take. But I do find his podcast to be highly educational.I offered the quote because it has a bearing on a discussion about Win98 security that's been running on MSFN for some time now.--JorgeA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaclaz Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 None of this means that I take whatever Steve Gibson says as gospel. That was the scope of my comment. The problem with him (and many other) is that he is actually followed by lots of people, so his opinions (no matter if right or wrong) are often mistaken for facts (which sometimes are, sometimes are not).jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Usher Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 As of late 2009 (as far as I've gotten in his "Security Now!" series), he still wasn't using antivirus softwareI suppose Gibson does use the best antivirus software a man can use: Brain 1.0. So do I. ;-P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JorgeA Posted July 28, 2011 Author Share Posted July 28, 2011 None of this means that I take whatever Steve Gibson says as gospel. That was the scope of my comment. The problem with him (and many other) is that he is actually followed by lots of people, so his opinions (no matter if right or wrong) are often mistaken for facts (which sometimes are, sometimes are not).jaclazjaclaz,Yup! This applies to every aspect of life. Just because "experts" tell us X doesn't mean we can shut off our minds and accept whatever they say, unquestioningly. In my view, we still need to reach our own conclusions.--JorgeA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JorgeA Posted July 28, 2011 Author Share Posted July 28, 2011 As of late 2009 (as far as I've gotten in his "Security Now!" series), he still wasn't using antivirus softwareI suppose Gibson does use the best antivirus software a man can use: Brain 1.0. So do I. ;-PLOLThat is indeed the best antivirus software! But I also think that (as the saying goes) "no single antivirus software will catch everything," so I use an AV suite as a, um, second line of defense. --JorgeA 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