|
Posted by Dan on September 25, 2006, 9:35 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
>>> I've always used a simple dialup for my on line work and have not had any
>>> virus issues at all using the EZAntiVirus from CA that I have installed.
>>> Along with this, I use the XP in-house firewall. This combo has worked
>
>>> My situation is unique as I need my system as free of 3rd party software as
>>> possible for the testing I do for developers producing add on software for
>>> the Microsoft Flight Simulator program.
>
> Hmm... does this mean that use in the real world, where folks do
> indeed have all sorts of 3rd-party sware, isn't tested? ;-)
>
>>> This being said, I have just signed up with RCN for their broadband cable.
>>> This of course will change my on line scenario, as the port will now be open
>>> all the time the system is on.
>
> We don't have cable here, but we do have ADSL - and there I'd go for a
> combination Ethernet NAT router and ADSL "modem", so that the PCs are
> hidden behind the router's NAT. Try to do the same thing with cable,
> i.e. don't allow anything to assign a globally-unique IP address to
> your PC (rather than to a router that NATs it down to private IP).
>
>>> What I need to know is this; RCN offers free Mcafee software
>
> AVOID!!
>
> Usually, when a bank, ISP etc. offers "free McAfee", it's a ghastly
> "MyCIO" thing that gives you no control over it at all - there's
> almost no UI at all, so you can't see what it's doing.
>
> Run away screaming... use your existing av and XP firewall instead.
>
>>> my experience with Mcafee is that it is invasive to the registry
>>> and slows my system, which is not the best thing when you need
>>> every once of performance for testing.
>
> Hmm. To test whether a game is fast enough, you should test on the
> minimum-spec PC it's to be sold to - not an optimised best-case.
>
> Earlier testing that looks for bugs etc. is easier on a clean system
> with duhfault settings, but passing that doesn't make the sware fit
> for sale; interactions with underfootware need to be tested too.
>
>>> Will my present combination of AV and using the XP firewall be sufficient to
>>> protect the system with the new broadband in operation or will I need to
>>> make changes in the way I protect the computer?
>
>> You need a multi-layered approach to security on your PC(s). The router
>> suggestion is a good start.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> I would also add Zone Alarm Professional to have protection at
>> both the hardware level and secondarily at the software level.
>
> That breaks the OP's need to keep the system clean :-/
>
>
>
>> ------------ ----- --- -- - - - -
> Drugs are usually safe. Inject? (Y/n)
>> ------------ ----- --- -- - - - -
So Chris, I guess you really do not like Zone Alarm Professional and is
it because it is too bloated or what is the reason? Thanks in advance
for your replies.
| 
XML site map