-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Madeline Brubaker wrote:
| Would someone step me through setting up Norton Internet Security
| Professional properly? I'm not entirely sure how to
Do yourself a favor, and don't run that software.
Yes, I'm a Linux nut. My attitude towards Windows boxe
David Masover wrote:
Madeline Brubaker wrote:
| Would someone step me through setting up Norton Internet Security
| Professional properly? I'm not entirely sure how to
Do yourself a favor, and don't run that software.
Yes, I'm a Linux nut. My attitude towards Windows boxes is: almost all
Windows
> I'm not a Linux nut, but I agree with this in principal. Just using a
> software firewall is totally insecure. Your best bet, if you don't want
> to bother setting up a Linux box to act as your go between, [...]
What, a linux/unix box is *not* a software firewall? :)
--
5:45PM up 132 days,
On Monday 14 June 2004 08:45 am, David Masover wrote:
> Madeline Brubaker wrote:
> | Would someone step me through setting up Norton Internet Security
> | Professional properly? I'm not entirely sure how to
>
> Do yourself a favor, and don't run that software.
>
> Yes, I'm a Linux nut. My attitude
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not a Linux nut, but I agree with this in principal. Just using a
software firewall is totally insecure. Your best bet, if you don't want
to bother setting up a Linux box to act as your go between, [...]
What, a linux/unix box is *not* a software firewall? :)
LOL
Dear
> Madeline Brubaker:
Please excuse the nuts around here that seem to be as much of a
problem as Apple lovers once were.
I don't particularly like some of Window's creations, but even though
Linus "releases" are getting slowly more usable for ordinary people,
they still do not have enough clo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael R. Stork wrote:
[...]
| a hardware firewall and NAT. I wouldn't connect any PC direct to a
| cable/DSL line.
I would. A linux one. Or better, a BSD one. With daily updates. The
firewall really wouldn't help all that much for me, although I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|>I'm not a Linux nut, but I agree with this in principal. Just using a
|>software firewall is totally insecure. Your best bet, if you don't want
|>to bother setting up a Linux box to act as your go between, [...]
|
|
| What, a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jay Oliveri wrote:
| On Monday 14 June 2004 08:45 am, David Masover wrote:
|
|>Madeline Brubaker wrote:
|>| Would someone step me through setting up Norton Internet Security
|>| Professional properly? I'm not entirely sure how to
|>
|>Do yourself a fav
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nicholas Sturm wrote:
| Dear
|
|>Madeline Brubaker:
|
|
| Please excuse the nuts around here that seem to be as much of a
| problem as Apple lovers once were.
Ooh! Ooh! I smell a rant!
Please excuse my response to being called a nut.
| I don't partic
David Masover wrote:
Michael R. Stork wrote:
[...]
| a hardware firewall and NAT. I wouldn't connect any PC direct to a
| cable/DSL line.
I would. A linux one. Or better, a BSD one. With daily updates. The
firewall really wouldn't help all that much for me, although I do use
NAT as an effective
David Masover wrote:
| What, a linux/unix box is *not* a software firewall? :)
Point taken. But Linux kernel vs Norton userspace? About the third
time I've said so on this list, but I just turn off the _services_ that
I don't use, and people get denied anyway, with no special firewall.
What's the
Now that we have let off the steam, did anyone ever really try to answer this nice person's questions to her satisfaction?
Sorry about stirring up the hornet's nest, but I do get tired of some insisting everyone should throw away
all their hard- and soft ware and get with the ONLY worthy system
13 matches
Mail list logo
