Protecting against malware with combinations of free progr..

"Virus Guy" wrote in message

> "David H. Lipman" wrote:
>
>> All the software in the world will NOT protect you if you do bot
>> follow Safe Hex practices.
>
> Safe Hex was a quaint concept 5 - 10 years ago. It's irrelevant
> today.
>
> How does one practice safe hex against DNS poisoning or server-farm
> hijacking?

One doesn't, what one *does* do is to try to keep their system up to
date so that exploits being served from the sites they are being
directed (or redirected) to aren't effective.

Safe hex isn't just about reading the URL and determining from that
whether or not to visit the site, although that *is* a part of it.

Years ago I tried to tell folks that there are *no* safe filetypes (all
filetypes should be scanned), now I guess one should stress that there
are *no* dangerous websites (only dangerous client software).

Your statement regarding "safe hex" only indicates your misunderstanding
of the concept. It was never the case that (for instance) not opening
e-mail attachments from people that you don't know, will keep you safe -
only that it will keep you safer. You could still get malware from
infected friends, but that does not make the rule irrelevant.