PDA

View Full Version : how to avoid XP service pack II



PierreBourdieu
10-17-2005, 02:03 PM
hi, I've been trying tu use dhtml on my webpages but what always happens is that XP sp2 blocks all the content, until I click on the spII bar to allow the content.
However I've seen many pages with the same dhtml code but without spII blocking...
can anybody helpme with this issue?

Twey
10-17-2005, 04:15 PM
Is this just locally, or live as well?

ddadmin
10-17-2005, 07:28 PM
The "sp2 bar" that appears when you run a script inside IE6 should only occur when you're doing so locally. When viewing a page with a DHTML script online, this bar doesn't appear.

For your own security, you should not put off upgrading to SP II any longer.

Twey
10-17-2005, 07:44 PM
For your own security, you should not put off upgrading to SP II any longer.
For your own security, you should not put off ditching Windows any longer :p
There could be many reasons s/he hasn't (up|down)graded to SP2. For a start, it's reputed to cause terrible problems on some systems. Quite aside from that, all the security in the world isn't substitute for a bit of net-sense. Think about it. What's better: to download an attachment without knowing who it's from and run it, only to be told by your antivirus system that it's malicious; or to disregard it in the first place? Eventually something will slip through.

ddadmin
10-17-2005, 09:12 PM
Well, without SP2, a Windows computer can quickly become hacked or overrun with spyware dispite exercising "net sense" from my experience. I know two friends that, within 1 minute of turning on their brand new computer and connecting to the internet, got spyware and popups installed. Without sp2 Windows is vulnerable to exploits that basically require no user action.

Overall I think Microsoft is heading in the right direction with Windows. Are Macs really more secure than present day Windows? Perhaps, but somehow I suspect it's also due to the fact that most hackers don't commit a lot of time to trying to hack into a Mac, similar to Firefox until it started getting popular.

Twey
10-18-2005, 05:55 PM
Well, without SP2, a Windows computer can quickly become hacked or overrun with spyware dispite exercising "net sense" from my experience. I know two friends that, within 1 minute of turning on their brand new computer and connecting to the internet, got spyware and popups installed. Without sp2 Windows is vulnerable to exploits that basically require no user action.
A person can still update Windows with the security patches without installing SP2.

Overall I think Microsoft is heading in the right direction with Windows.
This is a matter of opinion - for a start, what the right direction actually is. It can't be denied that they've opened the world of computers up to a whole new generation of people who are too computer-illiterate to have previously used a computer. However, this was more due to marketing than any amazing innovations the software R & D. For example, the ease of installing a device on Windows (one big reason many people use it) is due to the fact that nearly everyone produces Windows drivers for their devices - because everyone uses it. "Windows is popular because it's popular" is a common axiom. Windows gained a foothold in the software industry by either good marketing or immoral business practices, depending on whom you believe, and now having had that foothold in the past is the main thing keeping it there. It's a vicious circle that not many people can be bothered to break.

Are Macs really more secure than present day Windows? Perhaps, but somehow I suspect it's also due to the fact that most hackers don't commit a lot of time to trying to hack into a Mac, similar to Firefox until it started getting popular.
Mac OS X is a UNIX-based operating system. See my post (http://www.dynamicdrive.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18436&postcount=5) on Linux vs. Windows hosting.

P.S. Terminology: a "hacker" is merely someone who enjoys fiddling with computers, and sometimes security. A "cracker" is someone who breaks real-world computer security systems, usually for nefarious purposes.