From: "Geo" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0083_01C5BA42.A37A8250
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Of course the final stages are having malware running, that's the GOAL = you silly.
  "Rich"  wrote in message news:4328ddcd{at}w3.nls.net...
     The "final stages" in your scenario are that you have malware =
running on your computer.

  Rich

    "Geo"  wrote in message =
news:4328dcff$1{at}w3.nls.net...
    stop assuming you have malware running, instead assume you are in =
the first stages of getting malware loaded onto the machine by = exploiting
whatever features the machine lends to you.

    Geo.
      "Rich"  wrote in message news:4328c38c$1{at}w3.nls.net...
         Depending on what you believe the purpose of activation you may =
be right.

         As for being secure, that isn't the discussion here or if you =
think it is you are being a fool.  If you have malware running it can do =
what you can do.  If you don't want it to change something that an admin =
is intended to change then do not run as an admin.  Better still, don't =
run malware.

      Rich

        "Geo."  wrote in message =
news:432858e3$1{at}w3.nls.net...
        Gee you make it sound so easy, if the admin owns the machine =
then activation is doomed to failure. Or is there some point to this =
"more tedious"?

        I guess the users' firewall doesn't need to be as secure as the =
copy protection, huh?

        Geo.
          "Rich"  wrote in message news:432844cb{at}w3.nls.net...
             You can't keep out the admin for several reasons.  You can =
make it more tedious but it would be nothing more than window dressing.  =
The admin owns the machine.  Also, if there is any UI to allow a user to =
configure the software, which clearly needs to exist, then there by =
definition is a means to make changes.

             Basically, if malware is already running on a system it can =
do whatever the user account under which it is running can do.

          Rich

------=_NextPart_000_0083_01C5BA42.A37A8250
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








Of course the final stages are having =
malware=20
running, that's the GOAL you silly.

  "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:4328ddcd{at}w3.nls.net...
     The
"final stages" in =
your scenario=20
  are that you have malware running on your computer.
   
  Rich
   
  

    "Geo" <georger{at}nls.net>=20">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>=20
    wrote in message news:4328dcff$1{at}w3.nls.net...
    stop assuming you have malware =
running, instead=20
    assume you are in the first stages of getting malware loaded onto =
the=20
    machine by exploiting whatever features the machine lends to=20
    you.
     
    Geo.
    

      "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:4328c38c$1{at}w3.nls.net...
        
Depending on what =
you believe=20
      the purpose of activation you may be right.
       
         As
for being secure, =
that isn't=20
      the discussion here or if you think it is you are being a =
fool.  If=20
      you have malware running it can do what you can do.  If you =
don't=20
      want it to change something that an admin is intended to change =
then do=20
      not run as an admin.  Better still, don't run =
malware.
       
      Rich
       
      

        "Geo." <fake{at}barkdom.com>">mailto:fake{at}barkdom.com">fake{at}barkdom.com>
wrote =
in message=20
        news:432858e3$1{at}w3.nls.net...
        Gee you make it sound so easy, =
if the admin=20
        owns the machine then activation is doomed to failure. Or =
is there=20
        some point to this "more
tedious"?
         
        I guess the users' =
firewall doesn't=20
        need to be as secure as the copy protection, =
huh?
         
        Geo.
        

          "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:432844cb{at}w3.nls.net...
            
You can't keep =
out the admin=20
          for several reasons.  You can make it more tedious but it =
would=20
          be nothing more than window dressing.  The admin owns the =

          machine.  Also, if there is any UI to allow a user to =
configure=20
          the software, which clearly needs to exist, then there by =
definition=20
          is a means to make changes.
           
            
Basically, if =
malware is=20
          already running on a system it can do whatever the user =
account under=20
          which it is running can do.
           
          Rich
           

------=_NextPart_000_0083_01C5BA42.A37A8250--

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