Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective
From: Ken Smith (kensmith_at_green.rahul.net)
Date: 01/28/05
- Next message: Brian Aase: "Re: UL Approval vs. Others?"
- Previous message: Mark Zenier: "Re: Is microprocessor an integrated circuit???"
- In reply to: Nico Coesel: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Next in thread: Mark Jones: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: Mark Jones: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:46:06 +0000 (UTC)
In article <41fa6018.1204218614@news.planet.nl>,
Nico Coesel <nico@puntnl.niks> wrote:
>kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>I think what may be the best way to solve the problem is to place Windows
>>on a disk as the C drive, install all the applications from the shrink
>>wrapped boxes and then disconnect the write wire of the C drive. From
>>that point on, all the data goes on the D drive or it goes nowhere at all.
>
>Using windows as a user and not administrator does effectively the
>same.
Not even close to the same. Windows constantly writes stuff all over C
even when running as just "user mode". Bugs can allow important stuff to
be overwritten. ith my solution, most of the bugs don't matter.
-- -- kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge
- Next message: Brian Aase: "Re: UL Approval vs. Others?"
- Previous message: Mark Zenier: "Re: Is microprocessor an integrated circuit???"
- In reply to: Nico Coesel: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Next in thread: Mark Jones: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Reply: Mark Jones: "Re: OT: anti-malware progs ineffective"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|