A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

So anyone get hacked then?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 14th 17, 03:47 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Indy Jess John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,236
Default So anyone get hacked then?

On 14/05/2017 13:01, Martin wrote:

Using very old software is a bit similar to driving a 40 year old car. It's
possible but expensive.


I have cars over 40 years old. It is not expensive to run them. The
insurance companies assume that if you have kept them that long you are
not going to race them or drink and drive, so the insurance is dirt
cheap and in the UK there is no road tax to pay. The trick is to know
which models have plentiful spares so that you can maintain it off the
shelf instead of having parts custom made.

Jim
  #22  
Old May 14th 17, 03:50 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Indy Jess John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,236
Default So anyone get hacked then?

On 14/05/2017 12:49, Martin wrote:

Their policy is to provide maintenance for a fixed number of years after a
product becomes obsolete.


But they also declare when it is obsolete.
Other than to restart an income stream, there is no requirement to
produce a brand new OS every few years.

Jim

  #23  
Old May 14th 17, 03:57 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Ian Jackson[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default So anyone get hacked then?

In message , Indy Jess John
writes
On 14/05/2017 13:11, Ian Jackson wrote:

Well, in the various XP newsgroups, there are those who have said that
they turned off all updates years ago, and never had any problems. Some
don't even have SP3.


The first release of SP3 gave a BSOD if you applied it to a PC with an
AMD processor. It did cause someone I know to uninstall it and block
all further updates. As far as I know, he is still on SP2.

Jim

These days, the easiest way of doing a virgin installation of Windows is
to install the basic disks, them use WSUS Offline Update:
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=wsus+offline
or (only for WP) run XP Service Pack 4 Unofficial
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=xp+sp4:
However, to get the latest updates, you've still got to go to MS
Updates.

It's only a couple of weeks since I 'kept my hand in' and did a new XP
installation the 'old-fashioned way' - and that went OK. However - what
will happen now?
--
Ian
  #24  
Old May 14th 17, 06:14 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Indy Jess John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,236
Default So anyone get hacked then?

On 14/05/2017 15:57, Ian Jackson wrote:

These days, the easiest way of doing a virgin installation of Windows is
to install the basic disks, them use WSUS Offline Update:
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=wsus+offline
or (only for WP) run XP Service Pack 4 Unofficial
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=xp+sp4:
However, to get the latest updates, you've still got to go to MS
Updates.

It's only a couple of weeks since I 'kept my hand in' and did a new XP
installation the 'old-fashioned way' - and that went OK. However - what
will happen now?


I have done a virgin install of XP a while ago when I put a replacement
disc in a laptop. It did go to the MS Updates website and download the
outstanding updates. Although MS stopped maintaining XP some time ago,
they have left on their server all the updates up to the date when they
discontinued support so you can bring it up to "end of support" standard
provided you use a valid and non-duplicate licence key.

There is also a lot of hype surrounding this latest ransomware. If you
only use known trusted websites and don't click on any link or open any
attachment on messages you were not expecting, you should be safe enough.

Jim

  #25  
Old May 14th 17, 08:26 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Ian Jackson[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default So anyone get hacked then?

In message , Indy Jess John
writes
On 14/05/2017 15:57, Ian Jackson wrote:

These days, the easiest way of doing a virgin installation of Windows is
to install the basic disks, them use WSUS Offline Update:
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=wsus+offline
or (only for WP) run XP Service Pack 4 Unofficial
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=xp+sp4:
However, to get the latest updates, you've still got to go to MS
Updates.

It's only a couple of weeks since I 'kept my hand in' and did a new XP
installation the 'old-fashioned way' - and that went OK. However - what
will happen now?


I have done a virgin install of XP a while ago when I put a replacement
disc in a laptop. It did go to the MS Updates website and download the
outstanding updates.


These days, you normally have to get the IE6-to-IE8 update in order to
get to the update server.

Although MS stopped maintaining XP some time ago, they have left on
their server all the updates up to the date when they discontinued
support so you can bring it up to "end of support" standard provided
you use a valid and non-duplicate licence key.


I've done the XP installation many, many times. It always works in the
end - but it never seems to take exactly the same path twice!

However, if the update server really is AWOL, it may now be impossible
to install and get to the end-of-support level (plus any post EOS
security updates). [May try an installation tomorrow.]

'Tis also said that, with XP, MS no longer seem to be rejecting
validation with duplicate keys, or keys that don't match the make-up of
the computer. [Mine have all been kosher.]

There is also a lot of hype surrounding this latest ransomware. If you
only use known trusted websites and don't click on any link or open any
attachment on messages you were not expecting, you should be safe enough.


Well, just in case, I've installed the patch on three XP machines - and
I've got three more to do - plus a Vista - plus another which has
plug-in hard drives with W7, W8 and W10 on each.



--
Ian
  #26  
Old May 14th 17, 09:37 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Andy Burns[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 431
Default So anyone get hacked then?

Huge wrote:

Java Jive wrote:

Graham wrote:

iuqerfsodp9ifjaposdfjhgosurijfaewrwergwea.com


presumably one could put that in the hosts file and point it to
somewhere in the localhost/loopback range, say 127.0.0.254?


Don't do that.


Rumour has it that some of the "reputation" providers are doing just
that ... numpties! though of course tomorrow's fixed version of the
malware will fix the kill switch bug ...


  #27  
Old May 14th 17, 10:11 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Woody[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,794
Default So anyone get hacked then?


"Indy Jess John" wrote in message
...
On 14/05/2017 15:57, Ian Jackson wrote:

[snip]
There is also a lot of hype surrounding this latest ransomware. If
you only use known trusted websites and don't click on any link or
open any attachment on messages you were not expecting, you should
be safe enough.


Couldn't agree more, but there again those of us on here know about
computers and software and tend to overlook the fact that most people
are users and haven't a clue what goes on when they press a key or
click on a link. Indeed, how many realise that if they get a mail with
a hyperlink hold the mouse pointer over it will show you the
destination address at the bottom of the screen?

They are the same people that will get in the office tomorrow morning
and find a big sticker on their desk or machine saying to contact IT
before doing anything else - but they will still switch their machine
on in the meantime to save the wait whilst it loads up!


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com


  #28  
Old May 14th 17, 10:49 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Indy Jess John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,236
Default So anyone get hacked then?

On 14/05/2017 21:37, Andy Burns wrote:
Huge wrote:

Java Jive wrote:

Graham wrote:

iuqerfsodp9ifjaposdfjhgosurijfaewrwergwea.com

presumably one could put that in the hosts file and point it to
somewhere in the localhost/loopback range, say 127.0.0.254?


Don't do that.


Rumour has it that some of the "reputation" providers are doing just
that ... numpties! though of course tomorrow's fixed version of the
malware will fix the kill switch bug ...


The man who found the solution should have kept quiet about it. The
best security is sealed lips.

Once the papers published how he had done it, the originators knew to
produce Mark II.

Jim

  #29  
Old May 15th 17, 02:40 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johnny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 453
Default So anyone get hacked then?

On Sun, 14 May 2017 09:39:50 +0100, Brian Gaff wrote:

I'm not so sure that XP is so bad. After all its had the longest time to
fill in all its holes. More than any of those following. its amazing
just how robust it is. I've had stuff on windows 7 that has never
worried xp. I suspect the virus writers have moved on and are compiling
their code only for the later kernel of windows.

The only criteria that the malware authors might apply in filtering
would be driven by the risk/value equation of "Risk of early detection
versus the rather small ROI of their carefully crafted Zero Day Threat
being wasted on a minority OS". Basically, anything from winXP upwards is
a viable target - the same malware code runs just as effectively in all
of them, barring, in this particular case, a win10 installation that's
been fully patched.

Previous ransomewares coming out of the Russian Federation have filtered
on the language/keyboard settings to reduce the "****ting in one's own
nest" effect, namely detection of Slavic language settings and/or cryllic
font settings.

There's no reason why filtering based on OS version cannot be applied
but WinXP is still far from being a minority OS that's largely in the
hands of users 'with a clue' as is the case with win2k so whilst I can
readily imagine that win2k enjoys a form of immunity from ransomware
based ZDTs, winXP is still too juicy a target for this to apply.

For the past few years that I was using win2k whilst it had finally (and
thankfully!) 'gone out of support' up until a major hardware upgrade two
years back forced me to finally go over to Linux, I had a strong
suspicion that win2k was indeed being studiously ignored by the ZDT
ransomeware writers (less than 0.5% market share and a user base
comprised of a much higher percentage of 'clueful users' who *would*
recognise such an exploit within seconds of it landing on their systems
many of whom would be only too happy to contact the AV vendors to give
them a head start in nullifying the idiot[1] malware writers' efforts tut
suite).

I wouldn't be too surprised if the security software vendors finally
admit that this was actually the case now that such 'knowledge' is no
longer able to cause a reversion to win2k in a significant proportion of
the winXP user base[2] due simply to the lack of win2k driver support for
hardware less than 6 years old, let alone the fact that most software
versions of the past 7 or 8 years won't run or even install on a win2k
box anyway.

[1] 'idiot' on account of their stupidity in risking the wrath of those
who refuse to take the bull**** of MSFT so strongly present in winXP and
later versions of windows sitting down, let alone standing for the
annoyance of malware).

[2] A sensible decision to 'keep quiet' to prevent win2k becoming an
attractive target should enough idiot winXP users decide to revert and
pollute the win2k user base with exploitable idiot users. :-)

--
Johnny B Good
  #30  
Old May 15th 17, 07:15 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Andy Burns[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 431
Default So anyone get hacked then?

Brian Gaff wrote:

I'm not so sure that XP is so bad.


except the number of supported and patched browsers for XP is falling,

its had the longest time to fill in all its holes.


and still shares "old" holes with other versions of windows as last week
demonstrated, can be hit by malware that isn't specifically targeting XP

More than any of those following. its amazing just how
robust it is.


If used in a situation where it's isolated from the net, then fine ...
|
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.