If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
1. I would suggest using a wired connection with ethernet and a NAT address
within your router. You can go to grc.com and check the Shields Up test to see if over 1000 ports are stealthed with green setting. 2. I would suggest making sure your Windows 98 Second Edition and its associated updates are fully up to date and would suggest using the security cd if you have it although you will have to edit the *.inf as PCR has suggested to show to some programs that it is indeed 98 Second Edition. You will need to use the Windows update site after that. I cannot endorse the use of non-approproved Microsoft update packs and they may or may not work but use them at your own risk and make sure your PC is backed up fully before installing one of course. 3. I would suggest using an antivirus program like AVG antivirus that has worked well for me and my dad or Avast that many users here seem to like but I did not care for its interface. 4. I would suggest using anti-spyware programs and the ones I particularly like for 98 Second Edition are SpywareBlaster and Spybot Search and Destroy. Please make sure you get them from their main sites or a fairly safe alternative like majorgeeks.com website. I do not care for Adaware any more because of false positives in the past. Another one is CWShredder if you need it and HiJack This but with HiJackThis make sure experts help you and just don't go willy nilly and delete potentially good and needed stuff on your machine. 5. I would suggest using Mozilla Firefox version 2.0.0.8 or its latest version for better browser security and safety over Internet Explorer. Mozilla Firefox supports 256 bit cipher strength in Windows 98 that Microsoft only supports 256 bit cipher strength in Vista with Internet Explorer currently. Internet Explorer also has Active X vulnerabilites that are targetted frequently. The same goes for you Apple users and Linux users as well. Safari for Apple only has a maximum encryption of 128 bit so it is lacking as well. I have discovered that 128 bit encryption can be hacked in 15 minutes or less with 2 or 3 Craig Supercomputers working on the encryption strength cipher and that is why the industry is way behind on this. Bank of America and Citicards continue to use only 128 bit encryption and Bank of America does not seem to care but at least Citicards said they are working on implementing Mozilla Firefox with 256 bit encryption. The safest way is to post information on an off-line computer of course but industry standards are lacking compared to the latest threats available on-line to break computer encryption. 6. Please practice safe browsing methods and do not open email attachments until you are sure they are safe. Be aware of the many phising scams out there and especially ones that claim to be from Microsoft or someone or other wanting information or money because it is not what it claims to be especially if it sounds to good to be true. Contact the business from their main number from the telephone book or the back of your bank or from your business card. Information can help if you get stuck as well. Please also block html code as a default precaution and only view when you are sure it is safe. You can read in plain text and send in plain text and that is fairly safe. 7. Please be aware that information you post on the Internet is available for everyone to view so just remember how much information you are willing to freely give the public about yourself. 8. Please be careful about social-networking sites like MySpace and/or Facebook and others that could data mine your information. Heck, a website which was one I enjoyed posting at which was tsl-game.com had its forum hacked this summer with 9-11 propaganda posted. Here is the weblink if any are interested in reading about it: http://www.tsl-game.com/forum/index.php?topic=6115.0 9. Please be careful who you trust especially if you are younger than 21 because there are a lot of terrible people out there that ruthlessly prey upon weak and innocent children and hurt women also so the Internet has become a tool to try and force some people in bad situations to be monitored so much that they are like slaves. 10. A final word is to be careful what you download because if it is free games, wallpaper, software, music, etc. then you could be getting more than you bargain for originally and it is not worth it. You could be opening your machine up to spyware, adware, trojans, viruses, identity theft, etc. and lawsuits from the music or other industries against you and please do things legally. The end of my 10 comments that are good general computer tips with Windows 98 Second Edition in the front of my mind thus I had no reason to mention things like Windows Defender that is not supported on 98 Second Edition. If you check out the secunia.com website and do your research you will see how much safer Mozilla Firefox is than all versions of Internet Explorer and how 98 Second Edition is safer currently than XP Home and Professional. Fortunately, Vista is secure but has automatic issues, backwards compatibility issues and other issues because it is too new. Have a nice day. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
"Dan" wrote in message
... [Good advice snipped] 5. I would suggest using Mozilla Firefox version 2.0.0.8 or its latest version for better browser security and safety over Internet Explorer. Better check in advance before dumping IE because some other computer companies link exclusively with that (and not Firefox.) E.g. my bank processes work perfectly via Firefox but not Quicken/Intuit which links only with IE. A point omitted by Dan is PC housekeeping and backup routines. We should not use MSBACKUP which is seriously flawed. Hard drive space is now so cheap we seldom need to compress backed up files. Windows protection prevents our copying some important system files but some third-party utilities bypass this, see www.xxcopy.com -- Don Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
"Dan" wrote in message
... 1. I would suggest using a wired connection with ethernet and a NAT address within your router. You can go to grc.com and check the Shields Up test to see if over 1000 ports are stealthed with green setting. Without going back to check, IIRC the GRC port test checks 1500 ports. If the user has no router and does not use a sufficient third party firewall it means nothing. If they do have a router incorporated into their network, it also means squat if they fail to change the default un/pw provided with the router. In todays cat and mouse battle with the way hackers have progressed, one of the first lines of defense is to change the default un/pw of any router utilized in a network. 2. I would suggest making sure your Windows 98 Second Edition and its associated updates are fully up to date and would suggest using the security cd if you have it although you will have to edit the *.inf as PCR has suggested to show to some programs that it is indeed 98 Second Edition. You will need to use the Windows update site after that. I cannot endorse the use of non-approproved Microsoft update packs and they may or may not work but use them at your own risk and make sure your PC is backed up fully before installing one of course. IMHO the security update CD is not the way to go other than the rare exception after a clean install. If a user has a reasonably fast connection on the net, downloading and installing the updates will be much quicker than any read/write from a CD. 3. I would suggest using an antivirus program like AVG antivirus that has worked well for me and my dad or Avast that many users here seem to like but I did not care for its interface. Again, IMHO AVG is crap, Avast is subliminal. Either way, both apps will sooner than later be integrated into a suite and no longer support 98. 4. I would suggest using anti-spyware programs and the ones I particularly like for 98 Second Edition are SpywareBlaster and Spybot Search and Destroy. Please make sure you get them from their main sites or a fairly safe alternative like majorgeeks.com website. I do not care for Adaware any more because of false positives in the past. Another one is CWShredder if you need it and HiJack This but with HiJackThis make sure experts help you and just don't go willy nilly and delete potentially good and needed stuff on your machine. Without knowing your exact situation I will venture to guess that the Adaware false/positives had to do with cookies and/or MRU's. Adaware has always been a good compliment to SB S&D and visa versa, each one identifying something the other didn't. 5. I would suggest using Mozilla Firefox version 2.0.0.8 or its latest version for better browser security and safety over Internet Explorer. Mozilla Firefox supports 256 bit cipher strength in Windows 98 that Microsoft only supports 256 bit cipher strength in Vista with Internet Explorer currently. Internet Explorer also has Active X vulnerabilites that are targetted frequently. The same goes for you Apple users and Linux users as well. Safari for Apple only has a maximum encryption of 128 bit so it is lacking as well. I have discovered that 128 bit encryption can be hacked in 15 minutes or less with 2 or 3 Craig Supercomputers working on the encryption strength cipher and that is why the industry is way behind on this. Bank of America and Citicards continue to use only 128 bit encryption and Bank of America does not seem to care but at least Citicards said they are working on implementing Mozilla Firefox with 256 bit encryption. The safest way is to post information on an off-line computer of course but industry standards are lacking compared to the latest threats available on-line to break computer encryption. Personally IMHO again, your PC and/or network are only as secure as one makes it. It makes no difference on which browser a user deploys when it comes to online sites, the difference in security has to do with the administrator of that site and how well they lock it down. 6. Please practice safe browsing methods and do not open email attachments until you are sure they are safe. Be aware of the many phising scams out there and especially ones that claim to be from Microsoft or someone or other wanting information or money because it is not what it claims to be especially if it sounds to good to be true. Contact the business from their main number from the telephone book or the back of your bank or from your business card. Information can help if you get stuck as well. Please also block html code as a default precaution and only view when you are sure it is safe. You can read in plain text and send in plain text and that is fairly safe. Browsing the net and emails are two separate entities. Aside from that it should be stated that "No Email" should ever be opened if the sender is unknown to the reciever. 7. Please be aware that information you post on the Internet is available for everyone to view so just remember how much information you are willing to freely give the public about yourself. Not 100% true depending on how one reads into the statement and the way I read it's completely false. 8. Please be careful about social-networking sites like MySpace and/or Facebook and others that could data mine your information. Heck, a website which was one I enjoyed posting at which was tsl-game.com had its forum hacked this summer with 9-11 propaganda posted. Here is the weblink if any are interested in reading about it: http://www.tsl-game.com/forum/index.php?topic=6115.0 9. Please be careful who you trust especially if you are younger than 21 because there are a lot of terrible people out there that ruthlessly prey upon weak and innocent children and hurt women also so the Internet has become a tool to try and force some people in bad situations to be monitored so much that they are like slaves. 10. A final word is to be careful what you download because if it is free games, wallpaper, software, music, etc. then you could be getting more than you bargain for originally and it is not worth it. You could be opening your machine up to spyware, adware, trojans, viruses, identity theft, etc. and lawsuits from the music or other industries against you and please do things legally. The end of my 10 comments that are good general computer tips with Windows 98 Second Edition in the front of my mind thus I had no reason to mention things like Windows Defender that is not supported on 98 Second Edition. If you check out the secunia.com website and do your research you will see how much safer Mozilla Firefox is than all versions of Internet Explorer and how 98 Second Edition is safer currently than XP Home and Professional. Fortunately, Vista is secure but has automatic issues, backwards compatibility issues and other issues because it is too new. Have a nice day. XP Pro is by far more secure than 98/SE, again, it's up to the user/admin to lock the system(s) down. -- Brian A. Sesko { MS MVP_Shell/User } Conflicts start where information lacks. http://basconotw.mvps.org/ Suggested posting do's/don'ts: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm How to ask a question: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
"Brian A." gonefish'n@afarawaylake wrote in message ... | "Dan" wrote in message | ... | I will focus on your last question and I think Chris Quirke, MVP would agree | with me that Windows 98 Second Edition is safer than XP Professional. Here | are my web-links to prove my case: | | http://secunia.com/product/22/ | | Vendor Microsoft | | | Product Link N/A | | | Affected By 192 Secunia advisories | | | Unpatched 16% (30 of 192 Secunia advisories) | | | Most Critical Unpatched | The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows XP | Professional, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Highly critical | | http://secunia.com/product/13/ | | Vendor Microsoft | | | Product Link N/A | | | Affected By 32 Secunia advisories | | | Unpatched 9% (3 of 32 Secunia advisories) | | | Most Critical Unpatched | The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows 98 | Second Edition, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Less critical | | | That is my case. | | I responded without question. The only way 98 is safer than XP Pro is because it's | not targeted, that's all and no more. When XP Pro is configured properly it is by | far more secure than 98. Soon enough XP will be forgotten altogether as the full | attack goes Vista, and so on. | | -- | | Brian A. Sesko { MS MVP_Shell/User } | Conflicts start where information lacks. | http://basconotw.mvps.org/ | | Suggested posting do's/don'ts: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm | How to ask a question: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375 | | I disagree. As XP is based upon the same base code as VISTA it will always be attacked, and vigorously. The coding differentials are so minuscule, that even if specific to VISTA, the attack will work upon XP with equal if not more effectiveness, and even less difficulty as there will be less to work-around. What hacks VISTA *WILL* hack XP. 9X on the other hand, will receive less and less attention. One need look no further than this group. There aren't many people who can even write a simple batch file for 9X/DOS anymore. Not saying there will be no attacks, as there is still sufficient viri, hacks, and Spyware available [and targeted at installable 9X files]. But it brings no recognition, and the OS is not being used now [very much anyway] within supposedly secured areas and businesses as XP and VISTA are... You can ignore these rather obvious aspects and continue to spout how supposedly secure the newer operating systems are, but that smacks in the face of the purpose of the attacks... glamour, fame, recognition, ID theft, and all the other things now found with those NEW OSs... and the systems which use them.. To say the XP is more secure is like putting your head in a paper bag and claiming no one can see you... -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com ________ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
"98 Guy" wrote in message ... | MEB wrote: | | I disagree. As XP is based upon the same base code as VISTA it | will always be attacked, and vigorously. | | The hackers are not "attacking" OS's. | | They are coding to take advantage of vulnerabilities in specific | modules when such vulnerabilities are discovered or announced. And let me guess, you think its all the professionals finding the holes.... gees you really are out there in a dream world aren't you.. | | 9X on the other hand, will receive less and less attention. | | Again, it's not the OS's that receive attention - it's the posted | vulnerabilities that get attention. OH REALLY. So these vulnerabilities are floating around in thin air right... if your going to post stupid stuff, do it in some of your other USENET haunts.. | | If a hacker thinks he can leverage a vulnerability then the attempt | will be made. | | Many of the vulnerabilities discovered over the past 5 years are | buffer-overruns. Truth is that win-98 (or it's relavent IE module) | will get tripped up when exposed to a given exploit. But usually it | will only hang or crash the module - it won't execute as the hacker | intended. SO gees, if the hack worked for XP and didn't in 9X, just why is it that you, in your infinite wisdom, think it didn't... oh tell me wise one .... -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com ________ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
I will focus on your last question and I think Chris Quirke, MVP would agree
with me that Windows 98 Second Edition is safer than XP Professional. Here are my web-links to prove my case: http://secunia.com/product/22/ Vendor Microsoft Product Link N/A Affected By 192 Secunia advisories Unpatched 16% (30 of 192 Secunia advisories) Most Critical Unpatched The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows XP Professional, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Highly critical http://secunia.com/product/13/ Vendor Microsoft Product Link N/A Affected By 32 Secunia advisories Unpatched 9% (3 of 32 Secunia advisories) Most Critical Unpatched The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Less critical That is my case. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
"Dan" wrote in message
... I will focus on your last question and I think Chris Quirke, MVP would agree with me that Windows 98 Second Edition is safer than XP Professional. Here are my web-links to prove my case: http://secunia.com/product/22/ Vendor Microsoft Product Link N/A Affected By 192 Secunia advisories Unpatched 16% (30 of 192 Secunia advisories) Most Critical Unpatched The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows XP Professional, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Highly critical http://secunia.com/product/13/ Vendor Microsoft Product Link N/A Affected By 32 Secunia advisories Unpatched 9% (3 of 32 Secunia advisories) Most Critical Unpatched The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Less critical That is my case. I responded without question. The only way 98 is safer than XP Pro is because it's not targeted, that's all and no more. When XP Pro is configured properly it is by far more secure than 98. Soon enough XP will be forgotten altogether as the full attack goes Vista, and so on. -- Brian A. Sesko { MS MVP_Shell/User } Conflicts start where information lacks. http://basconotw.mvps.org/ Suggested posting do's/don'ts: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm How to ask a question: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
Thank you, MEB. In addition, Windows 98 Second Edition has less services
than XP Professional thus it presents a smaller attack surface than all the services that XP has compared to 98 Second Edition. Chris Quirke, MVP is working on a maintenance operating system for Vista based on Ubantu Linux and you must remember that 98 S.E. does have DOS for its maintenance operating system. It would be great to have a trial of a clean install of Windows XP Professional and a clean install of 98 Second Edition and see which a hacker(cracker) could break into first. On another note, on page A16 art.com apparently was hacked and the hacker or hackers broke through multiple layers of security to break into the website so it just goes to show if you want true safety and security that you use an old 486 IBM PC or such and store your passwords there and not have it connected to the internet and just use a password and even if a burglar breaks into your home they will most likely ignore such an old PC anyway. I am becoming more convinced that Linux will be the wave of the future, at least for the techies. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
"Brian A." wrote:
I responded without question. The only way 98 is safer than XP Pro is because it's not targeted, that's all and no more. Bull****. Win-2K and XP were incredibly vulnerable to at least 5 network-based worms that enabled those systems to be directly infected and trojanized without their owners performing any act such as opening e-mail or surfing the web. Micro$oft is completely responsible for configuring XP (home and pro) with certain settings and certain services turned on by default which exposed those systems to the above-mentioned network vulnerabilities. Micro$haft traded security for reduced end-user support load and in doing so they exposed millions of idiots to infection who bought XP-based home computers during 2002 and 2003. Macro$haft didn't even have the wisdom to alter the default installation settings of XP-home to more closely match the demands of the computing environments those systems were likely used in. The term "Internet Survival Time" is very well known (look it up on Google). It was coined as a measure of how long an un-patched 2K or XP system would last on the net before being hit by a worm. It became a joke that you couldn't take a brand new install of 2k or XP and hang it on the net and download patches without being infected before the patches were installed. You can take an original Win-98/se system and hang it on the net (with default settings, no AV and no firewall, no NAT router) and it's not vulnerable to anything. Half the IE5 and IE6 vulnerabilities that affect 2K and XP don't even apply to 98. Macrosoft has time and time again posted advisories about vulnerabilities where they list 98 as being affected in the advisory summary, but don't list 98 in the details or FAQ section. That's their way of making dupes like you, and the stupid tech press, believe that XP wasn't a step backward when compared to 98. When XP Pro is configured properly it is by far more secure than 98. In your dreams. The best XP can hope for is to be as EQUALLY secure as 98. And that only came in the summer of 2004 with SP2 - almost 2 years after XP was introduced. If you want to talk about desktop (login) security - that's another matter completely. Most people here are not concerned about what amounts to physical system accessibility, and that's not what this thread is about. IT and sys-admins hated and looked down on 9x for that reason. But their notion of "security" is not what we're talking about here. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Securing Windows 98(SE) in the Modern Age
MEB wrote:
I disagree. As XP is based upon the same base code as VISTA it will always be attacked, and vigorously. The hackers are not "attacking" OS's. They are coding to take advantage of vulnerabilities in specific modules when such vulnerabilities are discovered or announced. 9X on the other hand, will receive less and less attention. Again, it's not the OS's that receive attention - it's the posted vulnerabilities that get attention. If a hacker thinks he can leverage a vulnerability then the attempt will be made. Many of the vulnerabilities discovered over the past 5 years are buffer-overruns. Truth is that win-98 (or it's relavent IE module) will get tripped up when exposed to a given exploit. But usually it will only hang or crash the module - it won't execute as the hacker intended. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Installing 98se on modern hardwa Asrock 775DUAL-VSTA motherboard | 98 Guy | General | 5 | February 12th 07 04:32 AM |
Securing Windows98 | Davy | General | 4 | August 8th 05 01:14 AM |
Modern computer case? | ms | General | 7 | April 8th 05 12:43 PM |
Securing access to Computer/Windows | General | 2 | September 24th 04 03:16 PM |