[Info-vax] Maybe a bit OT, maybe not.. in any case an interesting article

[Fritz Wuehler]

Paul Sture <paul at sture.ch> wrote:

> On Fri, 18 May 2012 11:13:09 +0200, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> 
> > Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 2012-05-17 16:53, David Froble wrote:
> >> > Bob Koehler wrote:
> >> >> In article <jp0rk3$jlg$1 at dont-email.me>, David Froble
> >> >> <davef at tsoft-inc.com> writes:
> >> >>> I rarely re-boot, and I never turn on automatic updates.
> >> >>
> >> >> This is reportedly the most common cause of actual Windows security
> >> >> failures. The crackers examine the patches to find out where the
> >> >> security hole is, and then attack unpatched systems.
> >> >
> >> > My opinion is that the most common cause of security breeches is not
> >> > having a good router and other firewall protection. No, not the
> >> > firewall junk on weendoze.
> >> >
> >> > If a cracker cannot reach my system, then he can do no harm.
> >> >
> >> > Anybody here that opens something that they don't already know about
> >> > gets kicked off the network. Then it's not my problem.
> >> 
> >> And the most common types of exploits are not other users contacting
> >> your machine, but you inadvertedly and unknowingly downloading software
> >> that exploit your system, and that software then connects to some
> >> exterior host, thereby setting up an access vector to your computer. If
> >> you think a firewall is protecting you in any way, you are seriously
> >> mistaken.
> > 
> > No, that's the whole point of Windows firewalls. The threat from Windows
> > is within, as you said. And a good Windows firewall (zonealarm, kerio
> > etc) not only allows you to stop programs from *launching* but also
> > allows you to *stop* anything you haven't explicitly permitted from
> > connecting to the net.
> 
> And if you are using OS X, Little Snitch.

Wanna try again, in English?