If you enjoy reading this newsletter as much as I do writing it,
pass it on to all your friends and family. As always, this
newsletter is opt-in only. If you feel you've received it in
error, reliable removal instructions are at the bottom.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In this issue:
Opening comments
1. Klez-H, A very pesky bug
2. Product news, McAfee upgrades and Win98
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't forget, archived copies of all past news letters can always
be found at http://surfsafely.com/surfsafety/frameset_news.html
and are fully searchable.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. Klez-H, A very pesky bug.
==============================
In case no one has noticed, like a mosquito that just won't leave
you alone, Klez-H is still around and in a big way. Rarely a day
goes by that I don't see 2-4 email infected by Klez-H. McAfee
just upgraded it to a high risk virus for home users with the
caution that any user with this virus on their computer on July
13 risks serious damage. Evidentially, there's a time released
payload in there just for the amusement of the virus author.
Unfortunately, the McAfee warning came out only yesterday which
did not leave me much time to get this newsletter out to warn you
of it before then.
What is it that gives this virus such staying power? It's the way
it disguises itself to look like any number of seemingly harmless
email with file attachments. I've seen it create email subject
headers like "A funny game", "Windows XP patch", "Klez-H
immunity"
(How's that for an oxymoron?). You name it, it tries it. Sometimes
it borrows subject headers from email already on the infected
computers. Anything it can do to lure recipients into executing
the attached files. If you're not using some form of antivirus
protection, it only has to fool you once. It's all downhill from
there.
In all cases, the file attachments end with .SCR .PIF .BAT .DOC
and/or .EXE. Never, EVER execute an attachment from an unknown
source, no matter how innocent or how tempting. Never assume
that just "looking" at it is safe. The moment you click on it,
your computer is toast. The fact that this virus is still around
today is evidence that enough people are still being duped into
clicking on those attachments.
Most of the time, my antivirus software never has to do a thing
because I use Mailwasher to preview my email before downloading
it from the mail server. Email with virus attachments generally
stick out like a sore thumb in the Mail Washer preview pane so I
just delete them from the server. Despite the wide variation in
file sizes, Klez-H is no exception. If you haven't tried Mail
Washer yet, it's free and I heartily recommend it. Just visit the
"Online Resources" page at http://surfsafely.net/ for a link to
download Mail Washer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2. Product news
===============
Subscribers who have been on my mailing list for any length of time
know very well my hatred of being pushed to upgrade my software or
hardware for any reason. Especially annoying to me is the pressure
exerted by software and operating system developers who push the
envelope of processing power by simply writing sloppy code that may,
in the end, get the job done but with far too much waste of resources.
Like SUV's and luxury cars consume far too much gasoline to get from
point A to point B, so too does poorly written and bloated software
consume too much processing power to get a job done.
Any time I can find a way to squeak extra life out of my computer
hardware and software, I consider it a victory over companies who
would much rather see me plunk down my hard earned cash for their
wares that I neither want or need. There does come a time, however,
when hardware and software reach their "end of life" usefulness but
that point is much further out than the developers would like us to
believe it is.
With this in mind, I have two tales to tell. Good news, bad news.
First the good news. I am a long time user of McAfee antivirus
software; since long before anyone ever heard of this "Internet"
thing. Back then it was ARPAnet and strictly military in nature.
Back then, being online meant logging on to a local BBS and using
tools with names like Gopher, Archie and Veronica to locate files
on distant BBS's, a process that often took days, and 1200 baud
modems were all the rage in "high speed" data. In my opinion,
McAfee has been at it longest and they still do it best.
Always the penny pincher, I always look for freeware alternatives
before spending money on software. That day came once when the
freeware version of McAfee I had relied on for so long was simply
unable to provide adequate protection any longer. I gave in and
bought version 4 of McAfee's antivirus software. To date is has
always been reliable and fully supported by McAfee with updates
to the virus definition files as well as the internal scan engine.
Recently, though, I had a need to reinstall my original copy and
update the scan engine all over again. Much to my chagrin, when
I went to the McAfee web site I found statements there that they
would no longer support version 4. Everything I read led me to
believe that, if I downloaded the new updates and applied them to
my older software, it would not work. Having nothing to lose by
trying, I did, and guess what? It worked! Victory!
So, if you still use McAfee version 4 as I do, and you too are
reluctant to upgrade, let not their words sway you. The update
files for version 5 still work just fine with version 4, for now
anyway. This includes the scan engine updates as well. It's
all good.
Now the bad news (sort of).
I give computer safety advice to all sorts of people in all
stations of life all over the world. So how is it I come to be
so well respected for my advice? Simple. I've made all the
mistakes! Sometimes I even make mistahes on purpose! The main
difference is, most times I know how to recover.
Sometimes, though, recovery also means replacing. Such was the
case when my oldest daughter crashed the family Windows 95 computer
for the second time in a month. Each time I had to reinstall the
operating system. By itself, reinstalling the OS takes about one
hour. That's not so bad. But when you factor in that I also had
to run several full disk scans and reinstall most of the programs
because they would no longer run, now the recovery time is closer
to three days. That's intolerable.
So, I FINALLY upgraded to Windows 98 SE. What lured me was it's
enhanced disk management utilities designed to help prevent the
crashes that seemed to have become commonplace in my household,
and it's ability to recover from crashes more easily. Hopefully
I won't have to use that second part too often, lest I bar my
kids from the home computer for ever and ever, amen.
Other attractions to 98 are that it's been around a while without
too many reports of lingering bugs and many hardware manufacturers
simply no longer support Windows 95. n-Videa is a good example
of this. Great video cards, no Win95 drivers to make them go.
It raised a few eyebrows among my peers who learned I had just
upgraded from 95, but more surprising to them was the fact that
I only went to 98. With three new OS's ahead of it, (ME, 2000
and XP) "Why just one increment?" they asked. Easy. I still
do not trust the newer OS's to be as bug free as 98. With ME
still rumored to be loaded with unwelcome surprises, how much
better can the bigger, more complex 2000 and XP versions be?
I know too many people who have bought new computers recently
and lament the fact that it came preloaded with XP. It could
be the greatest OS on the planet but it doesn't matter if people
hate the user experience. I've used it. I don't like it either.
It's almost as great a departure from the way we're used to
operating a computer as the difference between Windows and the
Mac OS. Who cares how good it is if you can't get used to the
new way things are made to work?
To Microsoft's credit, all else being equal 98 is substantially
faster than 95 and the user experience is consistent with earlier
versions. Plug and Play support is much improved and subtle
changes to the multi-user log on screen make good strides in
security. No longer can an unknown user sit down at your keyboard,
type in a new user name and become a registered user on your
computer. In 98 you must pick from a list of predefined users.
But, you STILL should restrict default privileges else someone can
just hit Cancel at the logon screen and have full access to the
computer without logging on. Complete instructions on how to
configure multiple users and set privileges are found in chapter
4 starting on page 43 of my book "Child Safety-Net"
All in all, I like 98 SE. Hopefully it will live up to it's
reputation of being more stable than 95. That's my main concern.
I don't know if I can handle reloading the OS again any time soon.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Next newsletter
==================
I'm still working on a review of the new AOL 7.0 and it's parental
controls. It will be in my next newsletter.
If anyone has suggestions for other software you'd like to see
reviewed, please send them along to me at news@surfsafely.com.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's news for now.
Be informed,
Be involved,
Be well.
Sincerely,
Mark Brasche
Founder and CEO,
SurfSafely.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Come visit our growing family of web sites and services
=======================================================
http://surfsafely.com/ Our web directory/portal
http://surfsafely.net/ Our pre-filtered Internet service
http://surfsafety.com/ Our community site