geekhack

geekhack Community => Off Topic => Topic started by: tp4tissue on Fri, 14 October 2016, 22:04:07

Title: No anti-virus
Post by: tp4tissue on Fri, 14 October 2016, 22:04:07
Anyone else living dangerously ?

(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/ahaaah-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862489)
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: fanpeople on Fri, 14 October 2016, 22:51:31
Anyone else living dangerously ?

Show Image
(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/ahaaah-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862489)

Yep, **** protection.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Coreda on Sat, 15 October 2016, 00:45:55
I have doubts my AV (Defender on W8, so really MSE) would even protect me from malware, especially considering I run with UAC at the lowest level, but I keep it all the same. General sound advice seems to just not download anything suspicious in the first place, or if you do sandbox it when opening.

Or just use a different, isolated OS for all that.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: mike52787 on Sat, 15 October 2016, 06:52:26
Antivirus is for pussies and old people who click every link they see.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: tp4tissue on Sat, 15 October 2016, 08:05:27
Yea, Once you've got --internet-- figured out after a certain age..

It's almost impossible to get a virus ,,, by accident
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: nmur on Sat, 15 October 2016, 08:34:00
running Common Sense 2016 Pro
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: xtrafrood on Sat, 15 October 2016, 09:19:13
*Salutes* Private csmertx reporting in sir. I don't need an anti-virus sir.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: tp4tissue on Sat, 15 October 2016, 09:19:15
running Common Sense 2016 Pro

(http://onion-head.atspace.biz/big_onion/083.gif)
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Olumin on Sat, 15 October 2016, 09:30:27
(http://i.makeagif.com/media/8-09-2015/cvjhjz.gif)
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Leslieann on Sat, 15 October 2016, 19:00:23
Common sense?
Apparently a few of you haven't seen the latest attack vector for ransomware.

It's not being talked about much outside tech circles, but the latest and most effective form of attack lately has been to infect the source of your downloads.  I don't mean someone uploaded a crap copy to someplace like Filehippo, but actually hacking the developers own website. Not only does it make you think the download is safe, but it can also trigger an auto-update, sending an infected copy out to people with good copies. This is happening to legitimate software more and more often as the user allows it to bypass UAC.

Here is an example of one of the more well known attacks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_(BitTorrent_client)#Website_breach
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: fanpeople on Sat, 15 October 2016, 19:04:23
Common sense?
Apparently a few of you haven't seen the latest attack vector for ransomware.

It's not being talked about much outside tech circles, but the latest and most effective form of attack lately has been to infect the source of your downloads.  I don't mean someone uploaded a crap copy to someplace like Filehippo, but actually hacking the developers own website. Not only does it make you think the download is safe, but it can also trigger an auto-update, sending an infected copy out to people with good copies. This is happening to legitimate software more and more often as the user allows it to bypass UAC.

Here is an example of one of the more well known attacks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_(BitTorrent_client)#Website_breach

Can you tl;dr your point seems only relavent to bitcoin.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: xtrafrood on Sun, 16 October 2016, 03:02:13
Common sense?
Apparently a few of you haven't seen the latest attack vector for ransomware.

It's not being talked about much outside tech circles, but the latest and most effective form of attack lately has been to infect the source of your downloads.  I don't mean someone uploaded a crap copy to someplace like Filehippo, but actually hacking the developers own website. Not only does it make you think the download is safe, but it can also trigger an auto-update, sending an infected copy out to people with good copies. This is happening to legitimate software more and more often as the user allows it to bypass UAC.

Here is an example of one of the more well known attacks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_(BitTorrent_client)#Website_breach

Can you tl;dr your point seems only relavent to bitcoin.

People have breached the Linux Mint download servers on a few occasions. They were able to swap the legit distro ISOs with their own infected ISOs. No redirects. No phony websites.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3042173/linux/how-linux-mint-is-preventing-future-hacks-and-increasing-security.html (http://www.pcworld.com/article/3042173/linux/how-linux-mint-is-preventing-future-hacks-and-increasing-security.html)
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: fanpeople on Sun, 16 October 2016, 03:20:36
Common sense?
Apparently a few of you haven't seen the latest attack vector for ransomware.

It's not being talked about much outside tech circles, but the latest and most effective form of attack lately has been to infect the source of your downloads.  I don't mean someone uploaded a crap copy to someplace like Filehippo, but actually hacking the developers own website. Not only does it make you think the download is safe, but it can also trigger an auto-update, sending an infected copy out to people with good copies. This is happening to legitimate software more and more often as the user allows it to bypass UAC.

Here is an example of one of the more well known attacks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_(BitTorrent_client)#Website_breach

Can you tl;dr your point seems only relavent to bitcoin.

People have breached the Linux Mint download servers on a few occasions. They were able to swap the legit distro ISOs with their own infected ISOs. No redirects. No phony websites.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3042173/linux/how-linux-mint-is-preventing-future-hacks-and-increasing-security.html (http://www.pcworld.com/article/3042173/linux/how-linux-mint-is-preventing-future-hacks-and-increasing-security.html)

Would an anti virus pick up on that though? Bu that i mean distinguish the regit iso with the fake legit iso?
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: xtrafrood on Sun, 16 October 2016, 03:42:04
Common sense?
Apparently a few of you haven't seen the latest attack vector for ransomware.

It's not being talked about much outside tech circles, but the latest and most effective form of attack lately has been to infect the source of your downloads.  I don't mean someone uploaded a crap copy to someplace like Filehippo, but actually hacking the developers own website. Not only does it make you think the download is safe, but it can also trigger an auto-update, sending an infected copy out to people with good copies. This is happening to legitimate software more and more often as the user allows it to bypass UAC.

Here is an example of one of the more well known attacks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_(BitTorrent_client)#Website_breach

Can you tl;dr your point seems only relavent to bitcoin.

People have breached the Linux Mint download servers on a few occasions. They were able to swap the legit distro ISOs with their own infected ISOs. No redirects. No phony websites.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3042173/linux/how-linux-mint-is-preventing-future-hacks-and-increasing-security.html (http://www.pcworld.com/article/3042173/linux/how-linux-mint-is-preventing-future-hacks-and-increasing-security.html)

Would an anti virus pick up on that though? Bu that i mean distinguish the regit iso with the fake legit iso?

That would depend on the anti-virus. AFAIK I've yet to download a compromised ISO so I can't confirm nor deny that a malicious ISO would be detected with a scan. Best to scan all downloads, though. I've caught a malicious AHK installer once (EXE not an ISO obviously). A few days later I tried to download the AHK installer and my anti-virus was quiet so I'd wager that it wasn't a false positive.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Leslieann on Sun, 16 October 2016, 04:07:48
Tell compromised from legit? No, that's not how AV's work.
It would have to scan inside the ISO (which is a compressed drive image) and spot the ransomware file.  Frankly, on Win7 and probably 8, there's little chance of it, even Win10 it would be rare. Not only does it need to scan inside (which may require mounting it), but the AV would also need that ransomware fingerprint on file, which can take weeks.

It's hard enough for AV to spot zero day stuff, it's usually several weeks behind outbreaks (luckily they try and get a copy of it before the public sees it), MS can be months or years behind patching known vulnerabilities. When a vulnerability is found, they often shelve it until someone is found to be exploiting it, especially more complicated ones. It's cheaper, which is why AV updates are more important than OS updates in Windows.

On Linux, OS updates take priority because as soon as a vulnerability is found, someone gets on it and plugs it, usually long before it's  exploited. Mac is a different situation due to it's foundations and difficulty to program for, not necessarily because it's more secure, however when a major vulnerability is found Apple does try and get on top of it.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: fanpeople on Sun, 16 October 2016, 04:15:29
Tell compromised from legit? No, that's not how AV's work.
It would have to scan inside the ISO (which is a compressed drive image) and spot the ransomware file.  Frankly, on Win7 and probably 8, there's little chance of it, even Win10 it would be rare. Not only does it need to scan inside (which may require mounting it), but the AV would also need that ransomware fingerprint on file, which can take weeks.

It's hard enough for AV to spot zero day stuff, it's usually several weeks behind outbreaks (luckily they try and get a copy of it before the public sees it), MS can be months or years behind patching known vulnerabilities. When a vulnerability is found, they often shelve it until someone is found to be exploiting it, especially more complicated ones. It's cheaper, which is why AV updates are more important than OS updates in Windows.

On Linux, OS updates take priority because as soon as a vulnerability is found, someone gets on it and plugs it, usually long before it's  exploited. Mac is a different situation due to it's foundations and difficulty to program for, not necessarily because it's more secure, however when a major vulnerability is found Apple does try and get on top of it.

So in your original example would that be picked up by an anti virus?
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: xtrafrood on Sun, 16 October 2016, 04:30:02
Tell compromised from legit? No, that's not how AV's work.
It would have to scan inside the ISO (which is a compressed drive image) and spot the ransomware file.  Frankly, on Win7 and probably 8, there's little chance of it, even Win10 it would be rare. Not only does it need to scan inside (which may require mounting it), but the AV would also need that ransomware fingerprint on file, which can take weeks.

It's hard enough for AV to spot zero day stuff, it's usually several weeks behind outbreaks (luckily they try and get a copy of it before the public sees it), MS can be months or years behind patching known vulnerabilities. When a vulnerability is found, they often shelve it until someone is found to be exploiting it, especially more complicated ones. It's cheaper, which is why AV updates are more important than OS updates in Windows.

On Linux, OS updates take priority because as soon as a vulnerability is found, someone gets on it and plugs it, usually long before it's  exploited. Mac is a different situation due to it's foundations and difficulty to program for, not necessarily because it's more secure, however when a major vulnerability is found Apple does try and get on top of it.

I really like how  the Linux volunteers handle the security updates. Little updates that only take a minute. What Leslieann is saying is the reason why I stick with the biggest AV names when I use a Windows box. Some of them actually stick to a rigorous schedule of updating for the latest outbreaks. ISOs are a different beast altogether. So many layers. I figured they would be pretty difficult to scan.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Leslieann on Sun, 16 October 2016, 16:22:05
So in your original example would that be picked up by an anti virus?
It's actually possible, see below for why.

Regardless of whether or not it did right away, once your AV caught up it would detect it, without an Av you would continue plodding along blindly unaware your system was completely compromised. I'm not saying Av is perfect, but it is more responsive than MS or doing nothing at all. The thing to remember is that they are always behind on threats, would you rather be a week behind, a year behind or just completely ignorant of them entirely?



So why could it catch it?
AVs use "fingerprints", snippets of code that it uses to identify a bit of malware, any programmer can write a malicious bit of code, making it unique enough that an AV doesn't catch it however takes skill and knowledge. Someone who does this probably dedicates a good bit of their life to it. The same applies to people who can hack a website or makes the tools to hack a website, you have armies of people working against you blocking any obvious points of entry other than brute force, which believe me, A LOT still goes on. My web server was seeing an attempt every 10 seconds, AFTER I blocked China and Russia. This is why many hackers do more social engineering than actual hacking, it's easier to trick someone into giving you their password than to try and hack your way in "Hi this is Joe in tech support, we noticed a problem on your computer, can you help me access...", you would be amazed how many fall for it.

Back to our hacker... As a result of the difficulty, there are actually few people who can do both well. You can however buy/sell/trade hacks, in fact there is an entire economy built around this on the internet and as with anything underground, it's ripe with people ripping each other off as well as spies. If you are buying a hack, do you care if you used a legit credit card? Probably not, and do you think he cares to keep that card number secret as a result? Probably not, there is no honor among thieves after all. There are people selling tools to ID vulnerable systems, others selling hacks, virii*, credit cards, trojans, etc...

So, where does it leave this hack?
Chances are they bought a hack and/or a ransomware script and then went looking for servers vulnerable to said hack and they found Transmission's website. Could it have been targeted, of course, but it also may have just been luck of the draw on an unpatched server. This also means it probably wasn't what the press refers to as zero day**.


* Most virus writers in my experience do it for fun, as a hobby, and they keep to themselves trying to infect each other, it's a game of security research. Unfortunately, every once in a while someone lets one slip to a buddy trying to infect an ex- girlfriend or something and that's how we get these hasty buggers out in the wild. It's also why AV writers can block many before they ever reach the streets, they often get these snippets of code early on.
** Zero day is over-used, it may not be new at all, but instead only now just finding it's way into the wild, as explained above, many vulnerabilities are found long before someone tries to exploit them.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Leslieann on Sun, 16 October 2016, 16:50:37
By the way, virus writers are not the only ones playing these games with each other, this is the whole point of Def Con (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEF_CON).

Def Con is so bad, that even the attendees (security experts/hackers/ feds) fear for their computers* enough to not bring them or they bring systems they destroy afterwards. Think about that, security experts don't think they can save the computer...


And yet, you guys run Windows thinking you're safe because you know what you're doing.



*And credit cards, cell phones, anything electronic! They advise prepaid credit cards, never use the free wifi or hotel ATM and leave your phone off anywhere near the hotel.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: xtrafrood on Sun, 16 October 2016, 17:01:02
Yea but we're talking about exponentially increasing the chances of a breach by entering an enclosed area filled with dozens of legit hackers and caffeine. The difference is like swimming in a crocodile pit vs swimming in the ocean if my ask me. The wall of sheep is a pretty cool feature, though.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: fanpeople on Sun, 16 October 2016, 17:54:39
Woah i dont think anyone in this thread said they thought they were safe. In fact the running joke is living dangerously without anti-virus, not safely.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Leslieann on Sun, 16 October 2016, 19:40:30
Csmertx
You're describing security through obscurity.
"I'm one person in the ocean, my odds of a shark coming by and biting me are small", this is true with sharks, problem is, you aren't swimming with sharks.

Sharks and crocs are opportunistic, hackers are not. With broadband, routeable I.P.s, and the lack of I.P. rotation we used to have with dial up, you're actually more like a sitting duck and the higher your internet speed, the bigger the target you become. The days of security through obscurity have looooooong since passed.


Fanpeople,
Being on the internet is living dangerously, doing it on Windows without protection is more like Russian Roulette with not just your data, but also your hardware.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Coreda on Sun, 16 October 2016, 20:04:02
No one at Defcon is being protected by using an AV... I interpret the topic as more about user awareness of vulnerabilities and understanding how to avoid them vs blind trust in an AV to handle everything for the user.

As for circumventing AV detection it's not necessarily as complicated as it seems, as one article (http://www.attactics.org/2016/03/bypassing-antivirus-with-10-lines-of.html) posted earlier in the year where with just 10 lines of code they obfuscated some malware and obtained a 0/56 detection rate on VirusTotal. By themselves AVs can lead to a false sense of security if the user doesn't also understand how to keep themselves safe in general.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: tp4tissue on Sun, 16 October 2016, 21:53:19
Well for the work pcs.. I got the line setup for intranet only..
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Leslieann on Mon, 17 October 2016, 01:12:30
No one at Defcon is being protected by using an AV... I interpret the topic as more about user awareness of vulnerabilities and understanding how to avoid them vs blind trust in an AV to handle everything for the user.
Nothing protects you at Def Con, hence people taking disposable PCs.

We're getting a bit off topic, point is, an AV is pretty much the minimal line of defense you should have if you're going to use Windows on the internet.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: tp4tissue on Mon, 17 October 2016, 01:39:13
No one at Defcon is being protected by using an AV... I interpret the topic as more about user awareness of vulnerabilities and understanding how to avoid them vs blind trust in an AV to handle everything for the user.
Nothing protects you at Def Con, hence people taking disposable PCs.

We're getting a bit off topic, point is, an AV is pretty much the minimal line of defense you should have if you're going to use Windows on the internet.

also doesn't help that many of us install hijacked copies of windowz cuz we're p00r..
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: ANightOnCloudNine on Mon, 17 October 2016, 02:27:35
sometimes i **** up when i look for downloads and go to a virus site but i never download any viruses. i use AV less like a shield and more like a safety net for when im a retard
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: xtrafrood on Mon, 17 October 2016, 04:21:49
No one at Defcon is being protected by using an AV... I interpret the topic as more about user awareness of vulnerabilities and understanding how to avoid them vs blind trust in an AV to handle everything for the user.
Nothing protects you at Def Con, hence people taking disposable PCs.

We're getting a bit off topic, point is, an AV is pretty much the minimal line of defense you should have if you're going to use Windows on the internet.

also doesn't help that many of us install hijacked copies of windowz cuz we're p00r..

I went through that phase once. It sucked.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Leslieann on Mon, 17 October 2016, 16:53:44
Should have done the beta program, you got a free copy of Win10, I got mine that way.
Granted, you ended up with Win10 stuck in the beta channel (which is actually more like Alpha) and I'm not sure it's worth the drive space I store it on.

I also know some people who were using questionable copies of 7 and 8 that were "upgraded" to legitimate copies of 10 when the free upgrades were being handed out. Seems the MS upgrade authentication servers were easy to fool.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: tp4tissue on Mon, 17 October 2016, 19:33:31
Should have done the beta program, you got a free copy of Win10, I got mine that way.
Granted, you ended up with Win10 stuck in the beta channel (which is actually more like Alpha) and I'm not sure it's worth the drive space I store it on.

I also know some people who were using questionable copies of 7 and 8 that were "upgraded" to legitimate copies of 10 when the free upgrades were being handed out. Seems the MS upgrade authentication servers were easy to fool.


They were offering upgrades to Everyone, even pirated copies of win7, because they KNEW before hand that the pirated guys would NEVER EVER PAY to use an OS..


I was onboard  win10 in the beginning,  but after I installed it,  I realized it broke many of my work apps,  and it was also very high in latency for machine interface programs which were sensitive.

I'm sure if a program was made from the grounds up to run on win 10, they could reduce latency,  buhhhhh... how many software companies have the resources to do that kind of overhaul ?  And why would they do it,  when everything works just fine on xp  or 7


Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: katushkin on Mon, 17 October 2016, 19:57:14
I haven't used anti-virus for like four years. Oops.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: captsis on Mon, 17 October 2016, 20:21:09
anti malware/spyware only for me.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: iLLucionist on Thu, 20 October 2016, 18:49:17
Avoiding Win10 like the plague. So technically, it is almost impossibu to get virus on mah machines. Linux and OSX/Hackintosh only here. Gaming on the PS4.

I am seriously waiting for the moment when MS servers get hacked and one of the auto-updates is malware/rootkit. Now that I think of it... just hack NSA and add a remote listener to their stream of data. No need to get it from the users directly if someone else buffers/clones what we do anyway.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: Data on Thu, 20 October 2016, 19:14:54
Bunch of mavericks in here.  :p
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: YoshiCaps on Sat, 22 October 2016, 16:19:58
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/34/49/b7/3449b7c81ac85f806f530e64dd991040.jpg)
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: YoshiCaps on Sat, 22 October 2016, 16:20:44
nope, i like to protect my computer.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: potatobot on Sat, 22 October 2016, 21:21:51
is windows defender considered an antivirus? LOL

Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: YoshiCaps on Sat, 22 October 2016, 21:22:50
I would say yes.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: xtrafrood on Sun, 23 October 2016, 04:47:14
is windows defender considered an antivirus? LOL

I've never used it with Windows 10 Pro but I have used it with Windows 10 Home. It was aight. It seemed to protect me during the time it took to install a 3rd party anti-virus
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: rowdy on Sun, 23 October 2016, 04:50:51
is windows defender considered an antivirus? LOL

I've never used it with Windows 10 Pro but I have used it with Windows 10 Home. It was aight. It seemed to protect me during the time it took to install a 3rd party anti-virus

Or, if gave you a false sense of security while you installed a third party one.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: xtrafrood on Sun, 23 October 2016, 05:19:40
is windows defender considered an antivirus? LOL

I've never used it with Windows 10 Pro but I have used it with Windows 10 Home. It was aight. It seemed to protect me during the time it took to install a 3rd party anti-virus

Or, if gave you a false sense of security while you installed a third party one.

I was compromised while using anti-virus. I have no sense of security while I'm online. In fact, yesterday I read about an 11-year-old exploit for Linux that allows remote access (read & write). Apparently, the exploit allows circumvention of root password and logging. Wtf. And it's not like I'm weaving in and out of traffic while riding a bicycle. But I'm not switching to El Capitan :cool:. I've read that a lot of people are not exactly pleased about that new bug bounty initiative.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: rowdy on Mon, 24 October 2016, 04:57:36
is windows defender considered an antivirus? LOL

I've never used it with Windows 10 Pro but I have used it with Windows 10 Home. It was aight. It seemed to protect me during the time it took to install a 3rd party anti-virus

Or, if gave you a false sense of security while you installed a third party one.

I was compromised while using anti-virus. I have no sense of security while I'm online. In fact, yesterday I read about an 11-year-old exploit for Linux that allows remote access (read & write). Apparently, the exploit allows circumvention of root password and logging. Wtf. And it's not like I'm weaving in and out of traffic while riding a bicycle. But I'm not switching to El Capitan :cool:. I've read that a lot of people are not exactly pleased about that new bug bounty initiative.

Some people do all their online transactions inside a VM, and restore the VM to a pristine state each time they've finished.

I use a Mac as a primary machine at home and work.  The work one has El Capitan, the home one has Mavericks.
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: xtrafrood on Mon, 24 October 2016, 05:15:47
is windows defender considered an antivirus? LOL

I've never used it with Windows 10 Pro but I have used it with Windows 10 Home. It was aight. It seemed to protect me during the time it took to install a 3rd party anti-virus

Or, if gave you a false sense of security while you installed a third party one.

I was compromised while using anti-virus. I have no sense of security while I'm online. In fact, yesterday I read about an 11-year-old exploit for Linux that allows remote access (read & write). Apparently, the exploit allows circumvention of root password and logging. Wtf. And it's not like I'm weaving in and out of traffic while riding a bicycle. But I'm not switching to El Capitan :cool:. I've read that a lot of people are not exactly pleased about that new bug bounty initiative.

Some people do all their online transactions inside a VM, and restore the VM to a pristine state each time they've finished.

I use a Mac as a primary machine at home and work.  The work one has El Capitan, the home one has Mavericks.

I'm not sure about configuring a VM everytime I want to buy something online but I've put some thought into rolling another distro onto a flash drive for that purpose
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: potatobot on Mon, 24 October 2016, 05:18:33
is windows defender considered an antivirus? LOL

I've never used it with Windows 10 Pro but I have used it with Windows 10 Home. It was aight. It seemed to protect me during the time it took to install a 3rd party anti-virus

Or, if gave you a false sense of security while you installed a third party one.

I was compromised while using anti-virus. I have no sense of security while I'm online. In fact, yesterday I read about an 11-year-old exploit for Linux that allows remote access (read & write). Apparently, the exploit allows circumvention of root password and logging. Wtf. And it's not like I'm weaving in and out of traffic while riding a bicycle. But I'm not switching to El Capitan :cool:. I've read that a lot of people are not exactly pleased about that new bug bounty initiative.

Some people do all their online transactions inside a VM, and restore the VM to a pristine state each time they've finished.

I use a Mac as a primary machine at home and work.  The work one has El Capitan, the home one has Mavericks.

I'm not sure about configuring a VM everytime I want to buy something online but I've put some thought into rolling another distro onto a flash drive for that purpose

Would doing the online transaction in incognito + vpn help? Haha

Im not sure if hackers would attempt to steal my $20 though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: No anti-virus
Post by: C5Allroad on Mon, 24 October 2016, 07:26:56
running Common Sense 2016 Pro
I'm not running the pro version. Some benefits and should I upgrade?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk