Site Privacy issues

[Jim Isbell]

If cookies are a worry, do as I do.  I run a program called SpyHunter 
that runs on boot up every time.  It then offers to scan my compiuter 
for Spy Ware.  Since that takes some time I usualy opt only for a scan 
of my cookies.  This takes about 2 seconds, no more, and I have a full 
report on the cookies.  Since I have 17 cookies that are legitimate I 
usualy just look at the count.  If it hasnt increased I go on.  BUT 
there is also displayed a list of any dangerous cookies, their 
properties and who owns them.  If the list is blank then all is well. 
 If not I stop and delete the offending cookies.  The software is FREE.

Gordon JC Pearce wrote:

> John Lawson wrote:
>
>>   What irked me (and still irks me) about your post, was *not* your 
>> feelings towards my admittedly paranoid view anent intrusions on my 
>> personal computers - no, what pissed me off was that I was ready to 
>> learn from you and honor your knowledge - I was thinking that rather 
>> than engage in jejune absurdities, you'd have taken the time and 
>> space to help me out a bit - show me that perhaps I'm over-reacting - 
>> tell me why I oughta let the little cookies live on my machines.
>
>
> Ok, ok...  In my own defence might I just say that I have spent 
> roughly a third of my 2-and-a-half weeks holiday clearing up the 
> devastation that only unpatched Windows 2000 machines can bring, and 
> was feeling a little sore when I posted.
>
>>   Instead, you very heavily patronized *myself* with your adolescent 
>> screed of more-and-more ridiculous questions... "do I remove the 
>> battery at night and re-set the BIOS every morning" indeed!
>
>
> Don't laugh.  I knew someone who did this.  Really.  They had read in 
> $pseudotechy_periodical that viruses could live in the NVRAM in your 
> PCs clock chip.  I kid you not.
>
>>   I have had this IBM Thinkpad for about five years now, and got it 
>> while I still lived and working in Southern India. I have a firewall, 
>> a virus-checker, a spyware checker, and I disallow active-X, Java, 
>> Flash, Coookies (unless I can't get business done w/out them)etc. To 
>> date I have had one 'infection'; the Welchia Worm. And I got that 
>> during a network setup sesson at my employer's - I had to shutdown my 
>> firewall to synchronize permissions and set up various clients, 
>> someone else on the network was infected and I got it. Noticing that 
>> my port was communicating at nearly it's capacity and my computer was 
>> getting slow, I scnned it and killed the bug.  And that has been the 
>> only problem I've had to deal with in five years.
>
>
> I had a clever-clogs in the office of an Internet service provider I 
> used to work for disconnect his PC from the LAN and hook up a modem so 
> he could "send mailshots properly" - he'd taken it upon himself to do 
> a spot of "advertising" for our company.  He was dialled up for around 
> 25 minutes, and his machine was infected with Blaster.  This is 
> despite keeping it up-to-date (there wasn't a patch at this point), 
> although there was no firewall software on the machine.  Not a lot of 
> point, when you're supposed to be behind a proper firewall, is there?
>
>>   Thus am I being: Paranoid? Careful? Absurd? You tell me, Gordon.  
>> Just keep the sarcasm and grandiose flights of superiority to 
>> yourself, please.
>
>
> Eeeh, ok.  Well, everyone is entitled to their opinions.  Certainly 
> people can and do use cookies for identifying repeat visits, for 
> advertising and the like.  You can block these with any Mozilla-based 
> browser, and someone said (possibly on this list) that IE6 can do it 
> now too.  Since I don't run Windows (never have done, don't intend to) 
> I can't verify this.  Leaving cookies off and only turning them on for 
> sites that need them seems a bit pointless and inconvenient, but if it 
> makes you happier then go right ahead.
>
> I have to say, I am somewhat surprised at the number of people who do 
> use Windows on this list.  I would have thought that the various 
> open-source Unix-alikes would have appealled more.  Just don't let the 
> l337 skript kiddies get any ideas, in case they come up with some 
> 0-day 'sploit for TSS-8!
>
> Gordon.
>