"This hasn't happened for years."
Rellay? Happened to me less than a month ago!
"If your computer is on a 10/8, 172.16/12, or 192.168/16 subnet and you are accessing the Internet without a proxy, you are using NAT.
Most residental router will not allow incoming connections from the Internet without being configured to do so (either by UPnP or explicit user action.)"
Everything uses NAT basically and your IP address doesn't have to start with 192, 10 or 172 on an internal network. It starts with however you configure it to start in your DHCP scope. It can vary depending on you needs for the company. (ie. Different subnets for number of users, resources, departments and security access)
"Won't happen with a recent Windows system - Windows XP SP2 or later, which has shipped since 2004. For one, the firewall is turned on by default."
Really? Both times it happened to me happened to be on Windows XP with SP2. The Windows firewall is a joke, it has more holes than the US/Mexico border.
"notice the past-tense verb."
Probably because he was talking about something that happened in the past, he wasn't testing it while he was typing the article.
So basically, you are saying that anti virus isn't needed if you run Windows firewall and are behind a NAT server (ie. any home bought router)? Makes sense. Someone should alert the public on the millions of dollars they are wasting each year.
"I am an actual IT person and antivirus software is not needed in this situation."
You are the only one I have brought this issue up to that has said that. Some IT guy you are. I asked my teacher in computer school about this (MSCE, MPA+I, 30 + years in computers) about this and he said the same thing. First thing you do after installing Windows on ANY machine, is install anti-virus.
Why would you want to start certain services, install appropriate hardware/software and configure firewalls when you can just isntall anti virus? Would you rather 1 thing break or 10 things? Doesnt make sense. In a business environment, you have to have all these things. But you still install anti virus on the machines. There is always the possibility of infection and even anti virus doesnt eliminate it, it just makes it a lot less possible.
Edit: I am also done with this posting. I don't feel like responding to anymore postings about me being wrong. It is fine if you think I am wrong, I really could care less. I am just tired of responding to the same post every day and getting nowhere.
Rellay? Happened to me less than a month ago!
"If your computer is on a 10/8, 172.16/12, or 192.168/16 subnet and you are accessing the Internet without a proxy, you are using NAT.
Most residental router will not allow incoming connections from the Internet without being configured to do so (either by UPnP or explicit user action.)"
Everything uses NAT basically and your IP address doesn't have to start with 192, 10 or 172 on an internal network. It starts with however you configure it to start in your DHCP scope. It can vary depending on you needs for the company. (ie. Different subnets for number of users, resources, departments and security access)
"Won't happen with a recent Windows system - Windows XP SP2 or later, which has shipped since 2004. For one, the firewall is turned on by default."
Really? Both times it happened to me happened to be on Windows XP with SP2. The Windows firewall is a joke, it has more holes than the US/Mexico border.
"notice the past-tense verb."
Probably because he was talking about something that happened in the past, he wasn't testing it while he was typing the article.
So basically, you are saying that anti virus isn't needed if you run Windows firewall and are behind a NAT server (ie. any home bought router)? Makes sense. Someone should alert the public on the millions of dollars they are wasting each year.
"I am an actual IT person and antivirus software is not needed in this situation."
You are the only one I have brought this issue up to that has said that. Some IT guy you are. I asked my teacher in computer school about this (MSCE, MPA+I, 30 + years in computers) about this and he said the same thing. First thing you do after installing Windows on ANY machine, is install anti-virus.
Why would you want to start certain services, install appropriate hardware/software and configure firewalls when you can just isntall anti virus? Would you rather 1 thing break or 10 things? Doesnt make sense. In a business environment, you have to have all these things. But you still install anti virus on the machines. There is always the possibility of infection and even anti virus doesnt eliminate it, it just makes it a lot less possible.
Edit: I am also done with this posting. I don't feel like responding to anymore postings about me being wrong. It is fine if you think I am wrong, I really could care less. I am just tired of responding to the same post every day and getting nowhere.