From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0651_01C75BD4.597F2E50
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   unneeded =3D=3D unnecessary =3D=3D optional =3D=3D not critical.

Rich
  "Geo."  wrote in message =
news:45e6b7c7$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  Hmmm... "unneeded", "auxiliary", "not
critical", I don't see the term=20
  "unnecessary optional" in there at all Rich.

  Would you say the dns client service is unneeded, auxiliary, not =
critical? I=20
  certainly would unless you are on a large corporate LAN and you argued =
with=20
  me about it. See your idea of unneeded and mine are vastly different. =
To you=20
  unneeded is something that is not used at all, to me it's anything you =
can=20
  shut down without breaking the functionality you need.

  I would think the security guys at Symantec (the ones who made that=20
  recommendation) would think like me and judging from the size of their =

  products lately, management and the programmers think like you.

  That would explain why they make such a recommendation and at the same =
time=20
  get exploited as a virus entry point..

  Geo.

  "Rich"  wrote in message news:45e66bb5$1{at}w3.nls.net...
     Better understanding, I don't think so.  Different opinion, =
absolutely.=20
  There is nothing wrong with disabling unnecessary optional services.  =
What=20
  you do is flailing.

  Rich

    "Geo."  wrote in message =
news:45e64067$2{at}w3.nls.net...
    "Rich"  wrote in message news:45e4eb2b$1{at}w3.nls.net...

    >>   Now you are trying to read more into what symantec wrote.

    Or perhaps I just have a better understanding of that line of =
thought.

    Geo.=20

------=_NextPart_000_0651_01C75BD4.597F2E50
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   unneeded =3D=3D =
unnecessary =3D=3D optional =3D=3D=20 not critical.
 
Rich

  "Geo." <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote=20
  in message news:45e6b7c7$1{at}w3.nls.net...Hmmm...=20
  "unneeded", "auxiliary", "not critical", I
don't see the term =
"unnecessary=20
  optional" in there at all Rich.Would you say the
dns client =
service is=20
  unneeded, auxiliary, not critical? I certainly would unless you =
are on a=20
  large corporate LAN and you argued with me about it. See your idea =
of=20
  unneeded and mine are vastly different. To you unneeded is =
something that=20
  is not used at all, to me it's anything you can shut down without =
breaking=20
  the functionality you need.I would think the security guys at =
Symantec=20
  (the ones who made that recommendation) would think like me and =
judging=20
  from the size of their products lately, management and the =
programmers=20
  think like you.That would explain why they make such a =
recommendation=20
  and at the same time get exploited as a virus entry=20
  point..Geo."Rich"
<{at}> wrote in message news:45e66bb5$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
  =20
  Better understanding, I don't think so.  Different opinion, =
absolutely.=20
  There is nothing wrong with disabling unnecessary optional =
services. =20
  What you do is
flailing.Rich 
"Geo." <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote in =
message news:45e64067$2{at}w3.nls.net...=
 =20
  "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:45e4eb2b$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
 =20
  >>   Now you are trying to read more into what =
symantec=20
  wrote.  Or perhaps I just have a better
understanding of =
that=20
  line of thought.  Geo.


------=_NextPart_000_0651_01C75BD4.597F2E50--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5