Some Advice Please

Just to clarify (or knowing me, further confuse!) - the point about eg
Hotmail/Macromedia being blocked is not that sites one *knows* about, *are*,
but that sites that might turn out to be absolute gems *might be*. But
because we don't yet know that, we'll almost certainly *not* unblock them in
order to find out. We'll just assume whoever blocked them must have had good
reason to. Yet, for instance, block Flash and you don't discover Weebl.

Shane


"Shane" wrote in message news:...
Not *useless*, H, non-essential. I install and uninstall them depending on
what I'm doing, as it is an additional defence (among quite a few) against
known baddies. But Safe Hex pretty-much precludes their necessity. If you
stay away from dodgy sites, software and e-mail you won't get re-directed.
Meanwhile consider ready-made HOSTS files, Ad-shield block lists and the
like almost always debar some innocent sites - an error I feel is almost
inevitable if one trusts third parties to a). type several hundred urls or
portions thereof, or b). decide what the rest of us should or shouldn't
see, but also an error I feel is almost inevitable if one trusts *oneself*
to type etc etc etc.

I'm a strong believer in IE-Spyad (as well as a Firefox alternative!),
which does not bar access to, but rather places urls in the Restricted
Zone. Coupled with re-setting IE Security for Realistic (sic) Zone (as
opposed to the irresponsible settings Microsoft are *still* providing
IE/OE with!) - and unchecking the two *Install On Demand* settings - said
'dodgy' sites won't be using ActiveX or javascript to install or redirect,
should you happen to go to them.

In the end, though, it comes down to how one likes to surf. There are
those of us that basically only go to sites we need to and those of us who
feel the main point of the Internet is exploration. However, personally,
if what one wants to do is *see what's out there*, I feel it goes against
the spirit of it to block sites entirely based on the opinion of someone
one's never met - it's a bit like using AOL, isn't it? I speak based
entirely on personal experience. Last night I found an Adshield blocklist
denying access to Windows Update in 98se and ME! Previously I've known
HOSTS blocking Macromedia. And Lavasoft blocking Hotmail, iirc?

Shane




"Heirloom" wrote in message
...
If the HOSTS file is so useless to the experienced user, why does it
remain a staple on an MVP site.......is it simply to aid the
inexperienced user? After reading about it, years ago, it sounded like a
good idea to me and I have been using it ever since. As it works
silently in the background, without consuming any processing power (to
speak of) and takes up little space, where is the harm? Does it not
prevent redirects to unsavory third party sites and block ads/cookies/web
bugs from the same? Maybe I need to do more reading about it......or,
then again, maybe it is worthwhile.
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
Heirloom, old and there's no place like
127.0.0.1
oh yeah, and I also use the
Hoster app to manage the file.....
makes it easy to add irritants like
'doubleclick' to the list.

"Shane" wrote in message
...
I don't think it's such esoteric knowledge, Noel, that you appear
arrogant
for imparting it. I think there's a necessity to teach not only that
aids
such as a HOSTS file are important to the relatively-inexperienced
web-user*, but also that eventually they won't be.

* (To me the name 'Newbie' is actually more arrogant, at least while
there
remain generations that have not grown up with surfer-speak)

Shane

Noel Paton wrote:
I just realised that may have come across as incredibly arrogant! -
believe me, I'm still learning!! (may have passed the stage I exams -
more to learn before I get the certificate!)


Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to
NG's "Noel Paton" wrote in message
...
"I ain't never used a HOSTS file yet!!" - and I really see no need
to, unless you're in the habit of going to 'dodgy' sites!
Having said that, I do consider essential for those who are in the
early stages of their computer-competence exams.

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to
NG's "siljaline" wrote in message
...
"Job" wrote:
Silj, thanks for the link. I have printed it out and now
need to digest the info before implementing. I've also just
become aware of the MVPS Host at
http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm.

This appears to be a good thing but I need to read more.
Right now I don't have any idea of what a "Host File" is nor
why I should care g.

Your welcome for the link.
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/restricted.htm#Setting
*This* HOSTS file is practically a necessity these days.
All the information is in the link and FAQ.
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hostsfaq.htm

Silj

--
siljaline

MS - MVP Windows (IE/OE) & Security, AH-VSOP
_________________________________________
Security Tools Updates
http://aumha.net/viewforum.php?f=31

Reply to group, as return address
is invalid that we may all benefit.

Hi,

I have followed the directions for installing the HOSTS file from he

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm

'This download includes a simple batch file (mvps.bat) that will rename the
existing HOSTS file (HOSTS.MVP) then copy the included HOSTS file to the
proper location. For more information please see the readme.txt included in
the download.'

Why haven't I got an existing HOSTS file?

The only file simular is HOSTS.sam. It has put the new HOSTS file in
C:/Windows and every thing seems fine. Just wondering why I didn't have an
existing HOSTS file.

Thanks,

Craig.

Nothing unusual about that, Craig - Win ME doesn't by default have a HOSTS
file.

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
"canna" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I have followed the directions for installing the HOSTS file from he

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm

'This download includes a simple batch file (mvps.bat) that will rename
the
existing HOSTS file (HOSTS.MVP) then copy the included HOSTS file to the
proper location. For more information please see the readme.txt included
in
the download.'

Why haven't I got an existing HOSTS file?

The only file simular is HOSTS.sam. It has put the new HOSTS file in
C:/Windows and every thing seems fine. Just wondering why I didn't have an
existing HOSTS file.

Thanks,

Craig.

Thanks Noel, Just thought I'd check.

"Noel Paton" wrote:

Nothing unusual about that, Craig - Win ME doesn't by default have a HOSTS
file.

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
"canna" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I have followed the directions for installing the HOSTS file from he

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm

'This download includes a simple batch file (mvps.bat) that will rename
the
existing HOSTS file (HOSTS.MVP) then copy the included HOSTS file to the
proper location. For more information please see the readme.txt included
in
the download.'

Why haven't I got an existing HOSTS file?

The only file simular is HOSTS.sam. It has put the new HOSTS file in
C:/Windows and every thing seems fine. Just wondering why I didn't have an
existing HOSTS file.

Thanks,

Craig.

Although, as I realise you know, it has instead a hosts.sam file which is
a sample or rather an example of how and also where a hosts file should be
created.
--
Mike


Noel Paton wrote:

Nothing unusual about that, Craig - Win ME doesn't by default have a
HOSTS file.

Is it not true that the HOSTS file will not function, as such, with an
extension?? I am under the belief that, in order for it to work, it has to
be named, simply, HOSTS , with *no* extension.
Heirloom, old and still tired from last weekend


"Noel Paton" wrote in message
...
Nothing unusual about that, Craig - Win ME doesn't by default have a HOSTS
file.

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
"canna" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I have followed the directions for installing the HOSTS file from he

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm

'This download includes a simple batch file (mvps.bat) that will rename
the
existing HOSTS file (HOSTS.MVP) then copy the included HOSTS file to the
proper location. For more information please see the readme.txt included
in
the download.'

Why haven't I got an existing HOSTS file?

The only file simular is HOSTS.sam. It has put the new HOSTS file in
C:/Windows and every thing seems fine. Just wondering why I didn't have
an
existing HOSTS file.

Thanks,

Craig.

A working HOSTS file has no extension. The sam extension normally
indicates that the file is a sample or example of the construction of such
a file be it hosts.sam or lmhosts.sam.

Heirloom, old and still tired from last
weekend

As for me I'm already tired by the thought of the weekend to come. g
--
Mike


Heirloom wrote:

Is it not true that the HOSTS file will not function, as such, with an
extension?? I am under the belief that, in order for it to work, it
has to be named, simply, HOSTS , with *no* extension.
Heirloom, old and still tired from last
weekend