Re: Zone Alarm (free addition) and Netscape dialup accelerater.

"ArtDent" <par@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ta5Kg.1614$v%4.845@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Jason, don't you hear your own contradictions?

There are many ways to be confident that it's clean and most of them can
be done
by non-technical home users. Home users can easily recognise many kinds
of
unusual activity such as unexpected popups or some other sudden change
in
behaviour. Unexpected network traffic can also be detected by being
familiar
with what the lights on a network switch mean. A sudden unexpected
increase in
light flashing, particularly when the computer is not in use, will need
to be
investigated.

Non-technical indeed. Anybody would obviously know something was 'wrong'
if there were multiple pop-ups, but lights on a network switch? Come on!
If people did notice them, they would probably say "Oh, how pretty".

It's true that most people will fail to take note of this as a problem.
Many will have a look when they suspect something unusual may be happening.
They shouldn't have to do this, it's just that Windows PCs in their present form
make it a good idea.


It's also not too difficult to use a site like
http://www.hijackthis.de/ and to call for assistance from someone else
if
anything suspicious is found.

This you say you want from people that you say can't google? More
contradiction.

No because this is a procedure which can be learned and written down.
It does not require new research or technical knowledge of how it works.
And with a little effort Microsoft could have done something similar.
Why didn't they do that?
It is true that many people will have difficulty with such a procedure even if
written down clearly.

Call for assistance? Not everone has you for a relative / friend, but
even if they do have their very own IT expert, you just want to get
something (help) for nothing then.

You don't need your own IT expert, you just need to be able to call one when
required.
You don't need a doctor in your home all the time, you just call one when
required.
Home Windows PCs in their present form are very ill by default and cannot be
cured by adding personal firewall software. This should not be the case and it
is not the user's fault.


If they are more knowledgeable than most then it's only because they are
aware
of why it's a very bad idea to allow everyone to use an administrator
account
and to download and install anything they like whenever they like.

Which is a little different from the people I thought we were talking
about, you snipped my Joe six pack and Freddy the lawyer out so nice.

So why aren't Microsoft and PC vendors explaining these things to new users?
Why do most users have no clue that user accounts even exist?
Why do most users have no clue about the consequences of downloading untrusted
unknown software and running it in an administrator account?
This does not require technical knowledge.
You don't have to know how a car works to know that driving it over a cliff
might have serious consequences.
You don't have to know how snake venom works to know that you might want to
steer clear of poisonous snakes. If you do want to work with poisonous snakes
then you're going to have to contain them in such a way that they cannot hurt
anyone but can still live as poisonous snakes.


The user shouldn't matter, but in the case of a home Windows PC at
present it is
advisable to have some knowledge of why it's a good idea to delete
unexpected
email from people you don't know and why it's a bad idea to accept or
click on
anything you're offered without thinking about what the motive of the
site
offering it might be.

Total Contradiction.
BUT? Yes. No. What is it?

I don't see a contradiction. No technical knowledge is required for the above.
You simply need to know that some things may lead to problems.
What I see is an explanation of why the average home Windows user is going to
quickly get into difficulty. This should not be the case but it will continue to
be the case until Microsoft do something about it.


These things are Microsoft's problem not the
user's problem.

Excuse me? I thought we were talking about the user.
This is the bias I was talking about earlier, you don't seem to like
Windows.

Why should I like a product which expects a non-technical user to be able to set
it up and use it safely on an untrusted network with no help or education
whatsoever? and I don't mean technical education.
Why should I like a product which was never designed for use on an untrusted
network but is sold as though even the cat can set it up and use it safely at
home.
Why should I like a product that my home users have to have because all their
friends have it because all their friends have it but which is so badly designed
it's not fit for use by non-technical home users without help from someone with
technical knowledge. It's not like they get help or advice out of the box. All
they get for instructions is how to connect the parts together and turn it on.
If you want to supply something like this then it has to be secure without
requiring the user to know how to keep it secure. This is Microsoft's problem
not the user's problem. Expecting this problem to be solved by adding personal
firewall software which asks incomprehensible technical questions is just plain
ridiculous.

That is totally understandable.

Ah so I am getting somewhere then.
I was beginning to think this was a waste of time.

However, we are trying to go beyond that now, ok?

Ok.

We are supposed to be
discussing the user here and what they should or should not do, not whine
about things we don't like.

Users can be educated in what they should or should not do without needing to
have a clue how the computer works or how networking works. At present they need
more education in this than they should need.
It's a bit like selling people a car which requires detailed knowledge of how
the steering system works or how the engine works in order to be able to keep it
safely on the road.
Your theory appears to be that this problem can be solved by installing personal
firewall software which asks the driver questions like "The left wheel is
requesting a 30 degree move to the left, do you want to allow this?" or imagine
night driving on the highway. "Incoming lights from another car have been
detected. Do you want to let us be seen or use the cloaking device so that no
photons are returned? Oh and I've helpfully looked up the license plate and have
a name and address for you, I'm sure you'll find this list of 2000 people very
useful, after all it makes it look like I'm doing something useful, don't forget
to renew your subscription to me."


You can't expect users to have any technical knowledge at all.

A line I can agree with (even if I do wish for that 'test' I was talking
about, way back when), if only you hadn't said earlier that they _should_
know at least some rudimentary 'rules' (don't open unknown email, don't
download everything, etc.)

Tests are not as necessary as education, and I don't mean technical education.
Rules about opening unknown email should not be necessary and they were not
necesary until Microsoft decided that it would be an excellent idea to allow
users to send executable files to each other by email and have the code execute
as soon as the user (with an administrator account) reads the message.
How many users do you know who need this?
I never send executable code by email at all.

Your theory seems to be that a personal firewall should be installed so that
when a user with an administrator account who doesn't know about the dangers of
accepting any download from anywhere executes untrusted code, the personal
firewall will make the user aware that this code is attempting network
communication. I say LOL LOL LOL LOL.


Most people won't do it if the computer explains the possible
consequences of
installing untrusted unknown software.

That is what a personal firewall does!

Sorry no. In any case the explanation should really be given before the user
starts to use the computer. I've yet to see a personal firewall attempt to
explain anything in a way that a new user with no technical knowledge can
understand. Show me a personal firewall which can be understood with no
knowledge of TCP/IP.
Personal firewall vendors don't, in my opinion, want their users to have too
much real knowledge. A user with real knowledge will fix windows without needing
personal firewall software. A user without real knowledge will get into a mess
when they install personal firewall software which they can't possibly
understand.

You just want it built into the
operating system.

Anything built into the operating system should not bother the user with stupid
popup technical questions. You seem to have conveniently ignored the point that
asking the user technical questions like "do you want kfrhsy32.exe to use
internet explorer to send data to the internet" is ridiculous.
Would you be impressed if your brain were constantly asking you questions like
"The gall bladder is attempting to send bile to the intestine. Do you want to
allow this?"
You expect your body to deal with this without bothering you and without
requiring you to know how the gall bladder works or even why you have one, no?

Well, IT AIN'T, so we add it ourselves.

I was right when I said you would not be able to believe that the two PCs I
described have never had any malware problem without personal firewall software
and also without anti-virus software. And they have none-technical users. I
don't spend my time constantly removing viruses or spyware, I simply set things
up so that when combined with a little non-technical user knowledge the
computers run for years with no malware trouble.
Adding personal firewall software to these PCs would be ridiculous but I do see
many people crippling their home PCs by doing this.

If you wish to install personal firewall software then go ahead, I'm not going
to tell you what you should do with your own computer. I will however give
advice if requested and that advice won't include software which expects users
to answer technical questions.

Jason


--
I really like children, but don't think I could eat a whole one.


.