re: INFECTIONS: The old wives' tale put to bed
Wednesday, November 11, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Windows 98 Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by gewg_
(4444 messages posted)
gewg_ wrote:
||--though it's foolish and anyone with the slightest sense avoids it.
||
sekirt wrote:
|Um...thanks for saying I don't have the slightest sense.
|
Hey, I'm a nerd, not a diplomat.
...and you've been around M$ products enough to be aware of
how many back doors and trap doors and gotchas there are
yet you continue to spit into the wind.
That's not exhibiting what I consider common sense and certainly not wisdom.
|You forget...IF I never had any security problems with Win98
|and no security problems with Vista,
|then your comments are only boogeyman stories and nothing more.
|
I refuse to believe that someone who routinely runs as root
has NEVER been infected.
It may not have become the size problem that caused your ISP to cut you off,
but at some point over the years, you got an infection of some kind
--whether your band-aid layer pointed it out or not.
|OT
|Can you view a directory (unsorted)
|in the order the files were put onto the hard drive?
|So if I have 3 files, A B C and I copy them to a directory in this order C A B,
|can I see them in that order?
|
Not necessarily. If none of the files were ever messed with subsequently,
_then_ *n?x would list them in the order they were written.
If altered in any way (e.g. permissions), the *n?x directory listing utility
puts things in order of last change (of whatever type)
--but doesn't bother with creation dates as data points otherwise.
cache
of http://www.computerhope.com/unix/uls.htm
http://google.com/search?q=define:i-node
A journaling filesystem will put each file wherever it finds a big enough empty spot,
so neither NTFS nor ext3 would necessarily put them in sequential order physically.
Oddly enough, an OS using a FAT filesystem[1] would likely do what you want
(e.g. using a DOS DIR without any -O parameter to sort them
--which would list them by physical order)
with the probability of success proportional to
the time between the last defrag and the file's copying-over from another device
--but again, not a sure thing.
For my part, I wondered if it was possible to make backups of Windoze files
and somehow not disturb the creation date of the files.
I suspect it would require having to create my own OS/utility (or hack what exists).
WRT the topic of relative security of the platforms, this is a fun data point:
cache
of http://www.goodbyemicrosoft.net/print.php?news.205
[1] Linux supports FAT--along with dozens of other filesystems.
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 | | | | | | | | | |  | | | |  | re: INFECTIONS: The old wives' tale put to bed (gewg_: Wed, Nov 11, 2009, 10:53 pm) |
| |
| |
| |
Return to the Windows 98 Discussion Forum
|
|
