[crazy4laptops]

I have a computer running xp home sp2. I use it as a network drive and a shared print host. It is connected to the internet via a 10 port hub. I would like to know if xp is more secure when logged off or logged on.


AV- CA etrust 7

[phillypa800]

Networks, PC's, Laptops, etc. are vulnerble to attacks, hijacking, infections, trojans, multi-droppers, etc. whether logged on or off if you have this piece of cable connected, "ETHERNET CABLE" to the internet. You can have your comp. totally cold shutdown, and a hacker can turn that pup right on and use it as a host to fire off botnets if you are not appropriately protected.

Recommendation - stay up-to-date with definitions with whatever protection you have installed. Does not hurt to have several different types of virus programs, anti-spyware programs. "JUST BE ABSOLUTE CERTAIN" that you schedule those scans at different timeframes, otherwise they will crap out on you. Many people will disagree with my statement but if you take the time to set-up coordinated scan schedules, you'll be ok.

Keep in mind that one anti-virus/anti-spyware program will pick something up and the other anti-virus/anti-spyware program may not. It all depends on the makers definitions database, and so forth. This is why you can't go wrong with having several applications.

I currently have three anti-virus programs installed on my three comps, and roughly nine anti-spyware programs. I have them all well coordinated in time scans and thus far no issues. Other programs that I have are rootkitrevealer, hijackthis, etc. Those are manual processes.

Anyway, I probably blabbed on about nothing so please forgive if I side stepped from you question. Good luck and stay protected.

[Evildave]

Well... XP only supports one login to the GUI, so it's sort-of more secure by a tiny margin when left logged in, as long as you have physical security (i.e. it's locked in a closet), otherwise, people could walk right up and abuse the PC however they like.

XP is far more secure shut off. In this arena, and this alone is Vista 'better'. But only for a while, until all the similar exploits are discovered in Vista... though Vista may win for 'security through obscurity'. If it remains largely unadopted, malware writers won't focus on it. Even at 10,000,000 copies, it's 1% of the PC market.

Another simple possibility is get a dedicated print server + NAS appliance. Your PC will eat around 200 watts day and night, or up to around 5KWh per day, and according to your utility fees for electricity, that could be over $.50 a day, or $180 a year.

A little appliance to do the same thing will eat 40 watts, and since it usually runs an embedded Linux on an oddball (cheap) low power processor and doesn't accept 'normal' computer connections and services, it's virtually immune to alien attack. Some don't cost a lot more than the hard drive they contain. Some can be bought 'empty' with the hard drive ala carte.
http://www.google.co...ts?q=%22NetworkAttachedStorage%22+printer

A dedicated print-only server takes practically no power and is dirt cheap, too.
http://www.google.co...hl=en&q=Networkprintserver

So don't run your big, general purpose desktop computer to do what a tiny appliance will do in a closet. If it has a hard drive attached, be sure to put it all on a UPS. A cheap, tiny UPS will do. You can plug your wireless router, cordless phones and answering machine into it as well if you like.

BTW, Linux on a little subcompact notebook is another excellent option for a server. Plug a big USB hard drive into it, plug it into the printer, stuff it somewhere and forget it unless you need to make a change. You can even upgrade the tiny notebook internal hard disk to a reasonable size and you automatically get battery backup on it from the notebook's battery.