🚀 go-pugleaf

"no way" - well lets think about that. 
I am sure that NASA did not have "file and print sharing" active on their servers when they
were hacked earlier this year.
And I would also be surprised if they didn't have a great deal of 'anti-hacking' software
and firewalls employed. As did the Department of Defense and the numerous banks we've all
read about over the past few years. 
The issue is (as someone in this thread already pointed out) 'how badly does someone want
your files or system'?   Lets say someone was really good at hacking into systems, had a
high end 'port scanner' and was looking to steal some money.  Solely for 'stealing' ,
nothing else. The port scanner and address logging software 'could' locate numerous
unguarded systems. A macro to record keystrokes (thus passwords) 'could' be implanted and
functioning. *IF* a 'hacker' decided to download a Quicken users passwords and files, then
he or she might be able to access the banking programs. How much money could be stollen or
systematically transferred? I don't know, depends on the user and their prosperity. BUT I
DID SEE A DEMONSTRATION OF this at a users group and it was MOST FRIGHTENING. And it was
thru a 'dial up networking connection' (not the always on cable or DSL lines).

So I run 'Black Ice', behind a NAT (yeah it is a bit redundant) and I scan with "The
Cleaner" from Moosoft.com.   And a good friend of mine who hacks for a living for industry
security still believes he can get into my system. Fortunately I 'don't' do online banking
so there are no PASSWORDs to my  'large' (oh yeah, wanna buy a bridge) bank accounts.

Safe, maybe. Realistically safe, yup.  It is everyone's individual choice. But where there
is a 'will, there is a way'... 




NoneSuch wrote:
> 
> Yes, I disagree...
> 
> I would suggest that with file and print sharing disabled, and no
> 'extra' software installed on a Windows 95 machine, that there is no
> way for a hacker to 'break into' the machine and access files.
> 
> Yes, one might make it crash, one might disconnect it from the net.
> 
> These aren't strictly speaking 'security' issues, they are denial-
> of-service attacks.
> 
> On Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:17:43 GMT, Jeff Cochran <naplesweb@gulfcoast.net> wrote:
> >>>>1.  Can a hacker break into windows95 even though file & printer
> >>>>sharing is disabled, no firewall installed?  If yes, how much damage
> >>>>can he do?
> >
> >>>Yes, and as much damage as you can imagine, from wiping your drive to
> >>>using your system to attack others.
> >
> >>How ? I disagree.
> >
> >You disagree that a hacker can get into a system if file and printer
> >sharing is disabled?  What if PWS is active?  Whta about a trojan
> >backdoor sent in an e-mail message?  How about the exploits using CGI
> >on a website?
> >
> >Ignoring the fact that not checking the 'Share my drives with others"
> >box won't fully disable file sharing, there are many more ways into a
> >system than through file sharing.  If I can get anything through to
> >alter the registry, I can get to anything on the system in any manner
> >I wish.
> >
> >Jeff

-- 
Rich "Doc" Colley
      CNE4
mailto:doc@ecom.net