<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: About protecting the computer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tips.vlaurie.com/2008/06/how-to-protect-your-computer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tips.vlaurie.com/2008/06/how-to-protect-your-computer/</link>
	<description>News, commentary and tips for safer and easier computing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 16:48:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Vic</title>
		<link>http://tips.vlaurie.com/2008/06/how-to-protect-your-computer/comment-page-1/#comment-4818</link>
		<dc:creator>Vic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:21:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tips.vlaurie.com/?p=861#comment-4818</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Dean. I think that some form of white-listing is an excellent idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Dean. I think that some form of white-listing is an excellent idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dean</title>
		<link>http://tips.vlaurie.com/2008/06/how-to-protect-your-computer/comment-page-1/#comment-4817</link>
		<dc:creator>dean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:40:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tips.vlaurie.com/?p=861#comment-4817</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been away, so I&#039;m only getting around to commenting on this now. I use a system that is fairly unique. Rather than relying on black-lists -- a futile task when hundreds of new malware-spewing sites are created daily -- I rely on a white-list approach.

Through several simple registry changes, I make the Restricted sites zone the default zone, while allowing the user to add sites to the Internet zone and no longer allowing sites to be added to the Restricted sites zone (since it is now the default zone).

Unless a domain has already been added to either the Internet zone or the Trusted sites zone, one is very unlikely to experience a drive-by download from a malicious site, since the Restricted sites zone (by default) does not permit scripting or downloads. Occasionally, it can be a nuisance to get certain sites to work properly (many sites often require a multitude of enabled domains to work properly), but it is worth the effort in my opinion.

The practices noted in the squidoo.com link are also worthwhile. However, I would add that one should NOT rely on site ratings given by SiteAdvisor, which are often shockingly inaccurate. However, do go siteadvisor.com and see what the more reliable reviewers have to say about the domain in question. The reviews written by good reviewers (SiteAdvisor has a reputation rating) are generally more reliable than SiteAdvisor&#039;s ratings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been away, so I&#8217;m only getting around to commenting on this now. I use a system that is fairly unique. Rather than relying on black-lists &#8212; a futile task when hundreds of new malware-spewing sites are created daily &#8212; I rely on a white-list approach.</p>
<p>Through several simple registry changes, I make the Restricted sites zone the default zone, while allowing the user to add sites to the Internet zone and no longer allowing sites to be added to the Restricted sites zone (since it is now the default zone).</p>
<p>Unless a domain has already been added to either the Internet zone or the Trusted sites zone, one is very unlikely to experience a drive-by download from a malicious site, since the Restricted sites zone (by default) does not permit scripting or downloads. Occasionally, it can be a nuisance to get certain sites to work properly (many sites often require a multitude of enabled domains to work properly), but it is worth the effort in my opinion.</p>
<p>The practices noted in the squidoo.com link are also worthwhile. However, I would add that one should NOT rely on site ratings given by SiteAdvisor, which are often shockingly inaccurate. However, do go siteadvisor.com and see what the more reliable reviewers have to say about the domain in question. The reviews written by good reviewers (SiteAdvisor has a reputation rating) are generally more reliable than SiteAdvisor&#8217;s ratings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vic</title>
		<link>http://tips.vlaurie.com/2008/06/how-to-protect-your-computer/comment-page-1/#comment-4816</link>
		<dc:creator>Vic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jun 2008 00:35:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tips.vlaurie.com/?p=861#comment-4816</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the link. I am sorry to be late in noting your comment but last week was really hectic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the link. I am sorry to be late in noting your comment but last week was really hectic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tiktaalik</title>
		<link>http://tips.vlaurie.com/2008/06/how-to-protect-your-computer/comment-page-1/#comment-4815</link>
		<dc:creator>Tiktaalik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:01:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tips.vlaurie.com/?p=861#comment-4815</guid>
		<description>Hi Vic,

Here&#039;s how I protect (most of) my computers:

     http://www.squidoo.com/security2

Philip</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Vic,</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s how I protect (most of) my computers:</p>
<p>     <a href="http://www.squidoo.com/security2" rel="nofollow">http://www.squidoo.com/security2</a></p>
<p>Philip</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
