This is a general question concerning the best action a user should take to PG notices that global hooks or driver installs have been blocked. I have preferred not to use the learning setting when installing PG as PG would then allow whatever privilges a particular program stated that it required or (simply -- which is my concern -- wished to have). To maximize the security potential of PG, it seems that the best action to take is to provide a particular program with as few privileges as possible -- only those that are absolutely necessary to the program's function. I am aware that, through perusal of various threads on the issue as to whether to allow the installation of a global hook or driver or access to physical memory, one party, in the PG section of Wilders, recently replied that it would be best to allow the installation of whatever a particular program is attempting to install, assuming of course that the user recognizes the particular program. Still, certain execution files I have found -- case in point -- outlook.exe, requests installation of a global hook. PG gave me an alert and I blocked the installation and my MS Outlook 2003 does not appear to be suffering from the blocked installation. Moreover, since MS Outlook is often the mechanism through which viruses and other assorted insidious malware is often inserted into an OS, I have inferred that the fewer privileges I give to MS Outlook, the better. Similarly, I use an adblock program called "AdMunch," which, too, has requested installation of a global hook. I have allowed this as AdMunch appears to have a problem operating effectively in the absence of the installation of a global hook. The question is: does anyone know of the existence of a list of programs with accompanying suggestions as to what privileges need to be, or ought to be, allowed, in order to use PG to good effect and, at once, allow legitimate software programs to operate effectively. If there is no such list, perhaps DiamondCS can create one and publish it on either this Web Site or its own. I realize that there are literally thousands of programs available and, many more new ones are created continuously. The list could, then, be periodically updated. The advantage of such a list (or directory) would be that users of PG would not have to contact Wilder's Forum constantly to ascertain whether "this or that" program need be or ought to be given the privileges that it seeks and which PG, ever security-minded (as it should be), blocks. Does anyone else out there have an idea or comment concerning this idea? Thank you.