Home page logo

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: [in] Re: IE is just as safe as FireFox
From: "Gregh" <chows () ozemail com au>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:09:21 +1100

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Curt Purdy" <purdy () tecman com>
To: <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu>; <Colin.Scott () csplc com>
Cc: <full-disclosure () lists netsys com>
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 11:59 PM
Subject: RE: [in] Re: [Full-disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox 

Upgrade W2K to XP?  I call that a downgrade! I won't allow XP (sp2 or not)
on my network. All new boxes must be reformatted and W2K or SuSE Linux or
BSD installed (unless of course it is a Mac with OpenBSD kernel that is
always welcome).

Why? XP has System Restore in it which certainly beats the hell out of restoring an image any day when a minor problem 
crops up. Also, as you know what you are doing, it is no less able to be protected than W2K.

The only annoyance I have with XP on a network is it is dog slow to become part of the network unless you manually 
assign it an IP number, which I always do anyway. I never saw an auto assigned IP on a network so slow before this. I 
find XP to be basically W2K with a few extras in it but note I don't have anything to do with large networks when 
saying that so haven't had the chance to see it operating on one. 20-30 together though, it seems as good as W2K and 
when properly protected - as you would do with W2k - seems fine to me.

What am I missing?


Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]