My Security Setup, Can Anything Bypass It?

I get my popcorn and drink now. You will get some very nice reply!

 

only mse and a firewall if you need outbound protection is ok
you can use also use wot and noscript in frirefox and malwarebytes and asquared on demand and you are perfect

 

Sul, you don't fall into the typical category of one who does things with their pc such as browse the web, email, play games, listen to music, use the office apps once in a while, as opposed to yourself who does things to it. You've mentioned the latter about yourself many times You are also far and away more advanced than the average pc user too, although you are too modest to admit it.

TBH, it really pains me to know there are so many out there who run full administrator when there's no need to. Sure they have an arsenal of kernel-hooking-and-conflicting security apps to watch over them, but that's the whole gist of the problem; they are sacrificing performance and stability on their machines to compensate for the dangers of running with full privileges just so they can gain convenience and run their admin-only programs (I really wonder what those programs are?? ). The linux concept of supplying credentials whenever privilege escallation is required is, imo, a sound policy, and nothing wrong with using a similar approach (runas.. or UAC credentials) in Windows.

Oh, to respond to J_L, no, I doubt anything can bypass your fortress, unless that fortress collapses upon itself due to some conflict.

 

MSE really lags Paragon and makes it so unresponsive that it's a pain to create my images. Therefore I had to uninstall it, and opted for customized Avast (not all the shields).

A note for users trying Avast on Windows 7 64-bit with default-deny SRP, you have to add it as an exception rule or the AvastUI won't startup. Manually opening it worked fine for some reason.
Avast installs in the Program Files folder even though the processes are followed by *32. That may have confused my SRP, which normally allows anything under %HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\ProgramFilesDir% (Program Files), and Program Files (x86). My UAC may have something to do with it as well.

 

I agree completely. I really feel it is those who advance past "basic use" that get into the situation of preferring Admin over User, because they are using things a basic user probably won't. Programs such as Unlocker. It does not play well with SuRun for example, so you choose whether you want to continue to use it or not. There are many such tools, many of them very useful if you actually need them. Instead of making concessions, one is then forced to either do without something they really like or need, and just make do. At this point, if you know enough, why not run as admin. If you don't know enough, then as you suggest you must rely on so many other tools to help keep you safe. Whether these will sacrifice performance I would say is not black and white though.

Myself, I seek to minimize what little "typical" use I do within sandboxie or other means the OS provides. Imaging is my best friend, but I am always putting images on or making new ones, simply because I am playing with the machine. If I were to only do typical things, I would login as a User only. Many problems solved.

So many though rely on specific software that needs or is easier to use in Admin. Windchild suggested to dump such software and move on to ones that play nice in userland. I have to say, I agree with that, but it is sometimes hard to actually do. Perhaps as M$ bends more to not giving people admin accounts from the beginning, more software will adhere to userland protocols and this problem will erase itself.

But the bigger question, why stay with M$ at all? *nix is stable (or can be after learning much configuring) and offers much of the same basic tools. So, one could say if everyone switched over to *nix, it would be better. M$ won the OS wars because any fool could install the OS and just use it, for the most part. *nix, after some recent activity with it, appears to have gained ground but not closed the gap. Installing M$ platform is still relatively painless for anyone who knows nothing. At least it gives the appearance that it works properly

If *nix would just get gaming down, I think the computing world might just change for the better, as there would be no reason for a HUGE number of people to continue paying M$. But that is another topic...

Sul.

 

Ubuntu, and its spin-off Mint, have come awfully close to providing a viable replacement for Windoze Within 30 - 45 minutes one can have it fully installed and updated with a browser, email, music and movie players, a full office suite (OpenOffice), optical media burning software and a torrent client. You're right about it needing to be more gamer friendly, but for those with only basic needs, it's a terrific option worth considering, especially since it virtually eliminates the need for antivirus or other security measures, It installs easily side-by-side with Windows or as dual-boot or even in a vm if desired, so there is the option of keeping Windows and running Linux for, perhaps, risky surfing forays. Whoa, I better be careful not to venture ot with Linux ramblings; you got me started on this, Sul

 

bottom line is you can never be 100% secure. its a part of life. just like when ride a motorcycle, or drive a car, you will always have a chance of getting into an accident.

 

Simple answer to OP . YES !

 

Correct. I no excuse not use Ubuntu or Mint. They is better than Windows. But then there is no more fun and as you say no way to play many game. Also I read advance chinese programmer hacker say Linux is just as easy hack as Windows but just no market target for it. One other programmer say that Linux less secure than Windows! If true then may be Windows is fine. Ok? Sound like we believe Linux more secure because no one get infect on it. Not yet? By way I try argue that Linux more secure but I no know how argue against programmer with high knowledge. Ok?