MVPS hosts file

The problem is not that host files are bad at protecting you it's just that they are not updated enough.

 

See notes on DNS Client service they may or may not apply to your OS, please read carefully before proceeding.

 

Not a features of Google are disabled by MVPS Hosts as this would prevent you from using some Google services, such as Gmail, etc.

 

I had no trouble using GMail, with the MVPS hosts file running.

 

Yes, I've had that disabled for a long time without any problems, at least for the past six years. Turn it off and see what happens, you can always turn it back on if something goes pear-shaped, but I doubt that will happen.

Here's what BlackViper says about it.

 

Err I think you misunderstood, I use both OpenDNS and the MVPS Hosts file. OpenDNS mainly for phishing protection and blocking various sites, and the hosts file does the main work on cookies, ads, etc.

My point was one doesn't replace the other, use both!

 

That's what I've done for many months, if not years.


EDIT: Oh right, something very weird... I'm running the "Performance Edition" unofficial release of Windows XP to speed things up, yet it doesn't even set this service to manual which is recommended.

 

You should not if you not modified the file in any way.

 

Since Im looking for some easy security measures for the computer illiterate, I think Ill use a Hosts File for cross browswer support, and Open DNS.....as part of my repertoire.

What I would like to know is?

What is the difference between these Hosts files

MVPS
HPHosts
BlueTack
Malware Domains
& Others

 

There is also Peerguardian.

 

Only entries I believe since that's what a HOSTS file consists of.

 

I only trust MVPS to keep a tidy hosts file. He removes dead links, but also doesn't add things like peer to peer websites or torrenting websites, which some other hosts file makers do.

 

I use MVPS Hosts, hpHosts, Peter Lowe's AdServers, sh0rtie's Hosts, King of PAC Hosts, and Malware Domain List. I use HostsMan to merge them all, delete duplicates, and manage exclusions. I don't actually save this file as my Windows Hosts file. I use the disabled Hosts ability in HostsMan to save this to a file though (HOSTS.ehm). I then use a custom AutoHotkey script to create an Acrylic DNS Proxy hosts file from the disabled HostsMan hosts file. I use Acrylic DNS Proxy to service DNS requests on my system. Acrylic is much faster and easier to manage than the Windows hosts. I use Acrylic's hitlog capability along with HostsMan's HostsServer functionality to alert me to blocks. This probably sounds way more complicated and administratively intensive than it is.

I feel that using Hosts is a good way to combat malware and block ads, tracking, etc. If you can't connect to a site serving malware, you can't be infected.

 

I don't know about everybody else but personally I like to be able to connect to any website infected or not without getting infected. you can do this with products like Sandboxie. Why let Malware prevent you from viewing websites that you want to see when there is no need? Why do you need to Ban yourself from a certain proportion of the internet when we have products like Sandboxie? You might as well agree to sit behind a goverment filtering black list.

The only time I would ever use a IP blacklist is if I was downloading P2P to block
things like anti copyright companies.

 

How good is mvps at protecting against web bugs, trackers, parasites etc? In other words is it as good as ghostery? thanks.

 

Trackers, just block 3rd prty cookies in your browser. for web bugs just use a combination of 2. To block web bugs I use ghostery, noscript and admuncher.

 

It isn't really good at doing those things, in fact it wasn't really created for that. As Arran said, 3rd party cookie blocking takes care of trackers. Noscript is your best choice for the rest, imho.

 

The easy way for that is to not visit P2P websites (torrenting is the same as P2P) The hosts file isn't supposed to be a cyber-babysitter.

 

You sure about this? Noscript blocks javascript, etc. To my knowledge Ghostery is the add-on which blocks web bugs. MVPS claims to have this capability as well.

 

I think you misread my post. I'm glad he doesn't add those websites, thats why I only use his.

 

I agree with you on the value of Sandboxie, which is something I also use. I'm not so sure about the rest of your argument though. Based on your viewpoint, I suppose everyone using Adblock should drop it so as to not ban themselves from all the pretty advertisements they're missing out on? Should everyone drop the Network Shield in avast! and the IP blocking in MBAM too?

There's a big difference between using tools that the end user has complete control over vs. a government filtering black list. My hosts file has never prevented me from enjoying the websites I frequent and if it did, that's what the exclusions in HostsMan is for.

 

Gotcha, sorry about that.

@ Dregg: NoScript has an option to forbid web bugs as well I believe the option is found in the settings to block plug-ins, but I am not sure at the moment. MVPS blocks web bugs? I never saw anything about that. Oh well, if it does it does, if it doesn't, you know what will block them.

 

I think you're reading too far into the post The poster only means that websites, infected or not, may be able to be viewed without harm nor hindering by using an application such as Sandboxie....properly configured. Out of the box, absolutely not, but with tweaks, yes. Ad blocking is an entirely different argument. Btw, everyone for sure should ban themselves from MBAM IP blocking. In my own sole opinion, the thing is a piece of junk.

I completely agree with you on these kinds of tools vs government blacklists. We want safety, not censorship.

 

I could be wrong, but I think the vast majority of sites that make it onto these lists do nothing but serve malware. I'm not sure what the point of surfing these sites would be with or without Sandboxie. I've never had my internet experience soured because of these hosts files and my exclusion list is relatively small (most of them are p0rn sites).

 

Cool! Noscript is such a useful tool.