The gist of it is: this forum hijacked my word to advertise to guests of forum sponsors. Should a guest get bitten by a hijacked link via my hijacked word, I may get impugned, thinking I created the link.
I never noticed the 'hijacking' before; I was surprised by it. And I was afraid it was on my end, the browser.
I suppose the .rar driver issue can be solved by me decompressing it and move on.
If you thought Belkin was bad, you should see what happened to me with Linksys WUSB54G_V4 WiFi USB adapter. They don't have any drivers on their site, luckily W8.1 recognized it immediately and installed basic MS drivers so it can work. It was supposed to come with a CD with other utilities to expand it's capabilities but I didn't get it because it was used and previous owner lost it. When I tried to get those utilities from them (Linksys) they asked for more money than that adapter was worth. Needless to say eve the word Lynksys is banned from my dictionary.
That may sound like a good plan, but it is not. You are assuming your favorite trusted sites have not been, and cannot be hacked. That's a risky assumption! The recent Home Depot, Target, Sony, Xbox, PlayStation, etc. hacks have made it so you should assume you favorite and trusted sites have been hacked and you need to protect your computer (and its users) from compromise.Originally Posted by Cliff S
If you follow (and IMO, everyone should) the Department of Homeland Security's US-CERT Cyber Security Bulletin Vulnerability Summaries, as well as other independent security sources such as NSS Labs, you will find that IE is, and has been for some time, the most secure browser when it comes to Socially Engineered Malware. This is significant because "socially engineered malware" is the most successful and prolific method of malware distribution and includes extremely well written ads that entice users to "click" on those unsolicited links.
But this is NOT about which browser is best, faster, most compatible or resource thrifty. This is only about combatting socially engineered malware distribution methods. But even IE will let some ads through so I always use (and keep enabled) Adblock PLUS for IE.
THAT SAID, the user is ALWAYS the weakest link in security. ANY of the mainstream browsers will keep you safe IF you the user keep Windows fully updated, you use a decent anti-malware solution and firewall and keep them updated, and you avoid risky behavior like participating in illegal filesharing via Torrents or P2P sites, and you are not "click-happy" on unsolicited downloads, links, and attachments.
In other words, regardless your browser of choice you still must do all the same things to keep you and other users of your computer safe.
While I accept that program developers need to feed and shelter their families too - especially with free programs and services, it is still up to us users to ensure only what we want installed is installed. So another important step is for users to ALWAYS choose the custom install option when installing ANY program to opt-out of any of those ad-filled extras we don't want, or need on our systems. And it is up to us to avoid the desire, no matter how inviting and enticing, to click on unsolicited links.
Sorry I used my "tin foil hat" to wrap my Christmas turkey's legs so they'd get crispy. The last group of people I listen to on computer security is the US Gov't. The CIA FBI etc are part of homeland sec. Especially when the idiots them selves get hacked.
Ah! So you are smarter than them! I see.The last group of people I listen to on computer security is the US Gov't. The CIA FBI etc are part of homeland sec. Especially when the idiots them selves get hacked.
I say the fact they get hacked proves my point - and that is, any site can be hacked.
Since you are the expert here, what is the first group of people you listen too on security?
I for one, listen to myself only and risks I take are my only but when large organizations we all depend on for one thing or other take risks we can all suffer.
Only? Wow! I've been working IT security professionally for government, corporate, small business, and personal networks and computers since the early 70s and no way would I assume I, or any 1 person, is the sole source for security information.I for one, listen to myself only
I agree 100%. But it is not just them taking risks - some are just down right negligent. They fail to force regular admin password changes. They fail to remove log-in credentials from terminated employees. They fail to keep systems patched and updated. They fail to keep sensitive information isolated from public exposure and on and on... .but when large organizations we all depend on for one thing or other take risks we can all suffer.
BTW, since some discard Homeland Security's US-CERT Summaries without even bothering to determine what they are, I will explain briefly. The vulnerabilities noted in the summaries are those reported by the product makers and other security agencies. These vulnerabilities are NOT discovered or created by anyone in the CIA (???) or FBI, or HS.
I do take information in but not with a grain of salt, but whole ton of it. You can never know what, who or whose interests are behind it.
Ah! Now that make sense. And you are absolutely correct about "hidden agendas". In fact, that is what socially engineered malware distribution methods rely on.I do take information in but not with a grain of salt, but whole ton of it. You can never know what, who or whose interests are behind it.
Take the anti-malware industry itself, for example. What financial incentive do Kaspersky, Norton, McAfee, Avira, Avast, and the other anti-malware product developers have to rid the world of malware?
Answer: None whatsoever! That will put them out of business.