I will be honest, security is not my strong point…and i know Linux even less.
By running windows virtually through a box in linux will that make it more secure? As in there is really no way they can access the windows portion unless they first go through the linux portion or can it since it is acting like a real machine still be access through the same posrts and vulnerabilities?
These days most attacks are through application bugs, not sneaking in through ports, since modem/router/firewalls are ubiquitous. A virtualised Windows is just as vulnerable to malware and phishing as one running on real hardware. And if a crook makes away with your bank password, the money lost is very real, not virtual. So no excuse for being careless.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Virtual windows has the benefit of being easy to snapshot (be sure you
have your newer-than-shapshot data backed up first) for those times when
you become infected. As a result I leave off all antivirus/antimalware
software and just run and if I become suspicious I revert and take off
again. I install in a VM that has no network and apply the latest SP of
XP manually to be sure it is clean and all is well until I snapshot, and
then I don’t run as Administrator (always a good rule in computing
regardless of the OS), don’t use IE (always a good rule) and only use
tools I trust (I’ll never understand the need people have of adding new
screensavers endlessly… they’re by definition not going to be able to
enjoy them).
Good luck.
ken yap wrote:
> These days most attacks are through application bugs, not sneaking in
> through ports, since modem/router/firewalls are ubiquitous. A
> virtualised Windows is just as vulnerable to malware and phishing as one
> running on real hardware. And if a crook makes away with your bank
> password, the money lost is very real, not virtual. So no excuse for
> being careless.
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFJIrwQ3s42bA80+9kRAu6YAJ47LqOZSaRpOe1WVwAC+UBslzNccACfQAmR
uewlzVgVOQPzaldM+Br4Stk=
=GC5a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
The snap shots are basically just restore points aren’t they?
So is the main benefit of virtual to just have ease of jumping to the other OS?
So basically you have to decide on a trade off of dual boot and both OS can use full system power but you have to reboot to go to one or the other or have the other OS available in seconds?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Those are basically the benefits, yes. VMs also have other benefits for
your performance hit like the snapshots, abilities to have common
“hardware” across multiple boxes, ability to share entire systems
quickly/easily/reliably, etc.
Good luck.
wishdragon wrote:
> The snap shots are basically just restore points aren’t they?
>
> So is the main benefit of virtual to just have ease of jumping to the
> other OS?
>
> So basically you have to decide on a trade off of dual boot and both OS
> can use full system power but you have to reboot to go to one or the
> other or have the other OS available in seconds?
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFJIulk3s42bA80+9kRAsYIAJ9laykjUfphBbcvpoUnuPvKvzqGOgCfYuyr
OcGea06AHqXgacZfeRl+k/Q=
=rmTj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----