Harry Binswanger wrote:
> I know Robert has indicated that anti-virus software like Norton is
> unnecessary (at least for him). I would like to know if any XyWriters have
> been going without anti-virus software (even without ZoneAlarm) under XP.
I avoid Norton like the plague and have never had any anti-virus
software installed, on any of the four to five computers normally
running in this household, connected via wired LAN to the
router/firewall that sits at the end of my FTTH (fiber to the home)
connection.<*> Until about four months ago, the mix of operating systems
included Windows 98 SE and XP, now it's XP exclusively. My own two
machines and my wife's machine have never had any kind of virus
infection, period. One other computer used mainly for games and kid
stuff did contract spyware about twice in the last five years or so, but
since I regularly back up onto removable media, getting it back to
normal wasn't all that difficult. The router's firewall settings are all
cranked up to max, so to speak, and that's what I rely on for protection.
Gibson gives me an almost clean bill of health, except for a single port
that is reported "Closed", not "Stealth" like all the others. BTW, if
you use a router, remember that what Gibson tests is not your OS but
rather the security of the router itself:
"ShieldsUP! automatically tests your NAT router's WAN-side security
because the router's WAN IP is the single public IP that connects your
internal private network to the public Internet. When a test is
initiated by any system behind a NAT router, we are testing the
public-side security of the router itself and not the security of the
individual machines which are located behind and protected by the router."
<*> Nominal max. speed of my ISP connection (using NTT infrastructure) is
100 Mbps but the real-life throughput get is about 20 Mbps max when
accessing nearby large-pipe web sites. Therefore the copper LAN within
the home is not a bottleneck.
Wolfgang Bechstein
bechstein@xxxxxxxx