Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="danb" data-source="post: 1010120" data-attributes="member: 62850">Hehehe, how funny, you are mimicking my debate technique of asking for evidence <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite110" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />.Jeff, you are not fooling anyone, everyone knows it is you and that you have been cyberstalking me for 5 or so years, and you were caught red handed...[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://malwaretips.com/threads/spyshelter-12-8-released.115458/post-1005191[/URL]How funny, I told you that you were creepy here: <a href="https://malwaretips.com/threads/spyshelter-12-8-released.115458/post-1005204" target="_blank">Update - Spyshelter 12.8 released</a>, so now you are calling me creepy?&nbsp; As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.Even funnier yet... you were the one who suggested that AppGuard was a competitor of VS when you said &quot;I&#039;ve used NVT ERP, AppGuard, SecureAPlus and VS. VS is my favorite as it now stands.&quot;User accounts in no way resemble on-the-fly dynamic security postures.I am talking about the original DEFCON from NORAD which utilizes dynamic security postures.&nbsp; In fact, if you want to secure ANY system, you HAVE to utilize dynamic security postures.&nbsp; For example, if you want to secure a nuclear facility, you have to use dynamic security postures.&nbsp; It is too costly and inconvenient to be on high alert fulltime, and there are times when a lower alert level makes sense.&nbsp; The same logic applies to securing computer systems.&nbsp; And actually, because VS is able to apply dynamic security postures, it is able to apply a more robust locking mechanism compared to a fulltime lock, simply because the computer would not even boot if a more robust lock was applied fulltime.And finally, Jeff T, stop cyberstalking me!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="danb, post: 1010120, member: 62850"] Hehehe, how funny, you are mimicking my debate technique of asking for evidence ;). Jeff, you are not fooling anyone, everyone knows it is you and that you have been cyberstalking me for 5 or so years, and you were caught red handed... [URL unfurl="true"]https://malwaretips.com/threads/spyshelter-12-8-released.115458/post-1005191[/URL] How funny, I told you that you were creepy here: [URL='https://malwaretips.com/threads/spyshelter-12-8-released.115458/post-1005204']Update - Spyshelter 12.8 released[/URL], so now you are calling me creepy? As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Even funnier yet... you were the one who suggested that AppGuard was a competitor of VS when you said "I've used NVT ERP, AppGuard, SecureAPlus and VS. VS is my favorite as it now stands." User accounts in no way resemble on-the-fly dynamic security postures. I am talking about the original DEFCON from NORAD which utilizes dynamic security postures. In fact, if you want to secure ANY system, you HAVE to utilize dynamic security postures. For example, if you want to secure a nuclear facility, you have to use dynamic security postures. It is too costly and inconvenient to be on high alert fulltime, and there are times when a lower alert level makes sense. The same logic applies to securing computer systems. And actually, because VS is able to apply dynamic security postures, it is able to apply a more robust locking mechanism compared to a fulltime lock, simply because the computer would not even boot if a more robust lock was applied fulltime. And finally, Jeff T, stop cyberstalking me! [/QUOTE]

Verification