Hi Folks: I have been reading posts the last couple of days and I noticed an inordinate number of posts related to spyware and Internet Security. I am amused at the amount of energy people put into this subject considering the current state of technology. Internet Security . . . Like Military Intelligence, are mutually exclusive terms. If you choose to travel the information superhighway, then you expose yourself. When you drive your car down the road, anyone can see through the windows and if you are picking your nose, then everyone is going to see you picking your nose. on the Internet whatever you have on your PC is open to the sites you visit. If you can see out, they can surely see in. It's like any public domain, for the priviledge of using it you make sacrifices to your personal freedoms and privacy. Now I'm sure that many of you cry foul and say that it is your PC and no entity has the right to install unwanted software. However as one post pointed out, you gave them the right when you clicked "yes" to the EULA. Certainly these EULA's read like a law school textbook, but this is not a conspiracy that they read like this. It is protection for one thing, against fools out there who would choose to pirate the software or sue the company because the software was misused. So . . . the software house hires a lawyer to write an agreement between themselves an the user to protect themselves from the public at large which does have a shallow end to it's gene pool. Case in point, here are some real warning labels on products: There is also a stroller on the market with the warning, "Remove child before folding." On a box of household nails: CAUTION! - Do NOT swallow nails! May cause irritation! On a lawnmower was a big label which read: "WARNING WHEN MOTOR IS RUNNING - THE BLADE IS TURNING!" On a Chain Saw: Do not attempt to stop blade with hand. Now the nature of these warnings surely indicates that there are idiots out there who tried these things, probably with tragic results and then sued the companies for failing to warn them of the potential hazard. So we have EULA's on just about everything. Since they are written by corporate lawyers, they are written with an advantage to the company in mind. And ANYONE out there who would claim that in a simliar situation he or she would do any differently than these companies do . . . is a flat out liar. If you owned a big company or a small one for that matter . . . you'd protect yourself and utilize every advantage to maintain an edge over any competition. But I digress . . . There is no privacy anymore. If you live in a country that has donned the "Goden Straitjacket" of the geopolitcal/economic world then you are already in thousands of computer databases. Every purchase you make by check or credit is recorded. Where you go, what you do and what you buy is an open book for anyone with any level of experience or access to databases. You go into stores and are videotaped, government buildings . . . videotaped . . . PARKING LOTS . . . videotaped. This information is not protected . . . it is freely shared if anything. When you log onto the Internet, getting into your computer is incidental to the loss of privacy you suffer. They don't have to look in . . we tell them everything they need to know by the sites we visit. What do you think all of those servers out there are doing? Where exactly do you think SPAM comes from? These warm fuzzy sites that sell nothing directly to the consumer . . . where do you think they make thier money? If you drive down the road in your car, everyone can see inside. The only way to prevent this is by painting your windows black. But then you can't see out. And after all . . . isn't that what Windows are for? Personally I think that it's all hype to create paranoia and sell product. You couldn't protect yourself from a true invasion if you wanted to, any more than you could protect yourself from a carjacker. By the time you realized it was happening it would be too late. Take care and be safe . . . and have a cookie, it'll make you feel better, -TimeRider

I dont have problem with anybody looking into my computer, like i dont have problem with anybody looking at me picking my nose in my car... the problem starts when somebody looks in, to do some vandalism or to steal something... if somebody puts his hand through my car window i will shoot him (if i feel thretend by him)... and what some of those spywares are doing is physical theft... they are steeling my HD space and CPU cycles, my internet connection bandwith... and my personal time if i have to fix the computer that they vandalize... *you can look at me... but DO NOT TOUCH!!!* Regards Miro

Yea and whats your point??

Completely agree.. Lot of hype to sell "personal firewalls". After reading thru grc.com the first time i was almost to the point of never checking my email ever again. Every site in america now knows that Bruce Lee<--my computers name, my user name, my email identity etc. etc. likes to shop at ebay has a screen resolution of 1024X768 uses hotmail and msn chatrooms/communities downloads mp3's, subscribes to newsgroups etc. I think a good antivirus program is all the typical home user needs. Whos going to attack my home computer? Maybe they want to use my dial up connection for world domination! mwuahahaha

Hi Again: Here's the thing though Miro . . . what could you do to stop them?? In the event of a carjacking you say "I'd shoot them" . . . Well I don't know if you're familiar with carjacking but usually the puke puts a gun to your head at the onset . . . and even if you had your gun in your lap . . . which Law Enforcement would have a real problem with . . . could you shoot them before you made your mark in the world on the headliner of your car? Would you risk it? If some puke wants my car that bad . . . he can have it. I'm insured. Did you know . . . and this is true . . . that most people who get killed by a home intruder are killed by thier own firearm? It was once said that fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man. If someone can hack Microsoft, anyone can be hacked. Zone Alarm and Black Ice . . . all of that stuff is smoke and mirrors. If someone wants to "steal my HD space and CPU cycles, my internet connection bandwith... and my personal time if i have to fix the computer that they vandalize," then what can I really do to stop them? If they have the know how to do that in the first place . . . what . . . my free Internet firewall will stop them? When we engage ourselves . . . whether it be on the Internet or the street, we take and accept some inherent risks. If something bad happens . . . then we work through it . . . put it behind us . . . and get over it. To Overtime Collector: If you don't see my point then it would be lost on you in any event so . . . don't concern yourself too much. Just take the other advice and have a cookie . . . you'll feel better . . . trust me! Take care and be safe, -TimeRider

I think the real point here is that if everyone could run around doing what they wanted to without consequences, the world would be totally chaotic. Do you think that corporations left unchecked will "be good" just because it's the right thing to do? With the internet as new as it is, it makes it difficult to know where to draw the line, and have the government step in and enforce new laws. This is a very tricky time for government intervention though. Some say "They shouldn't be so strict with the laws" and others say the opposite. So until they're are laws for every type of internet action, either stay off the net or deal with it.

Hi Again: I think you make a valid point icu. But it does pose other problems. Let me give you an example. In the State where I live, it is a felony to fail to pay child support. A very noble law with wonderful intentions. My wife has three children with a dead beat father who has never paid a dime of what he owed. The debt is now over $22,000. He lives in an area that is quite a didstance from the County where the original order was filed. He works for cash in a different State so no automatic deduction occurs, and proving that he is working at all is problematic. Let's say he's driving down the road and gets pulled over for something and the warrant pops up on the Officer's data terminal. They will probably arrest him and take him back to their office and book him. Then they will call the County where the warrant was issued and say we have your man . . . if you want him come and get him. Since it's quite a distance, and the County holding the warrant doesn't have the manpower for that they tell the arresting agency to kick him loose. So what's the issue here? The issue is simply this. We as a constituancy are screaming at our legislative bodies to take less of our money. But at the same time we ask them to create new laws for various things. But in order to provide effective enforcement for these new laws there has to be people, equipment and facilities there to do it. People cost money, equipment costs money and facilities cost money. Who's going to pay? And equally important . . . who's going to watch the watchdogs? If we try to do it with what is already there . . . what other old laws are we willing to sacrifice to insure that these new laws are enforced? Don't misunderstand, I agree with you. I don't think that it is right. I am just saying that the reality of the situation is that we have no real defense on the Internet . . . and we assume our own risks by being there, as surely as if we were bungee jumping or skydiving. Take care and be safe, -TimeRider