more stealthy W98 or W2000 1

[Guest_imported]

Hi to all,
I am a user who wants to maintain privacy from prying eyes. I am concerned about a system administrator snooping internally on our LAN and external hacking threats. I am currently using W98 with several stealth tools.(Zone Alarm, BestCrypt, a few custom cleaners, and the paranoid options in WinUI-Tweak) I feel 'secure' currently from both internal and external viewing. I am concerned that with W2000 I will loose control and the internal System Admin will have open view into my system.
1) Am I wrong in my current secure feeling with W98?
2) Will W2000 give a SA opening to my files?

 

[iSeriesCodePoet]

First of all why are you worried about that much security on you computer at work?

Secondly, Windows 98 is never very secure. Those other programs might help, but I don't know how much. And Windows 2000? You will need Administrator rights to the computer that must be given to you by the Admin (I assume you are logging onto a NT domain). Then he will most definatly have access to your system, anyone on the network does. I do believe you can secure things quite a bit though to prevent some peering in. Mike Wills
AS400 Programmer


Please, if you find my post useful, let me know.

 

[FilthPig]

First off, if you're that worried about your SysAdmin or their policies, maybe you should voice your concerns to his/her supervisor. Unless you're trying to circumvent the SysAdmin's network policies, in which case I have no sympathy for you.

If you've encrypted your files and havn't given the SysAdmin the key, that's about as much security as you're going to get (which is still pretty good).

As far as the SysAdmin being able to get to the files on the laptop, there's almost always a way in, more so on Windows 2000 than on Windows 98. In Windows 98, you can disable sharing - however, as a SysAdmin, if I see a system on my network that's disabled the settings I've set up on it, I'm going to set it back up - It's my job. Windows 2000 is much more Administrator-friendly by design when used in a Domain, and allows Administrators much more remote admin capabilities.

Let your SysAdmin worry about external hacking attempts. Marc Creviere

 

[MasterRacker]

It's a requirement to administer something to have full access into anything and everything. A sysadmin should not be in that position if they are not trustworthy to stay out of HR and other sensitive documents.

If you are encrypting files and providing no way for someone else to open them then you are putting your business at risk if you are in an accident or something because the data would be unavailable. If the files are not business related then they do not belong at work in the first place.

In general, end-users who try and circumvent the sysadmin are a liability and a danger to the business and need to be fired.
Jeff
I haven't lost my mind - I know it's backed up on tape somewhere ....

 

[MasterRacker]

<tongueincheek>
I meant that they should be terminated. (You could fire them first, but it's easier for the assasins to find them if they're still in your workplace.)
</tongueincheek>

Seriously, you are in the workplace and everything you do is for the benefit of the company, therefore you don't need privacy. Also, one of the most important reasons to go to Win2000 or WinXP is to give your sysadmins more control.
Jeff
I haven't lost my mind - I know it's backed up on tape somewhere ....

 

[Sapient2003]

stealthdesired--
You can do a lot more with Windows 98 in protecting your data than you can do in Windows 2000. The first step of protection is encryption. I suggest you use PGP to encrypt all of your sensitive data. This will not prevent people from breaking into your computer and grabbing that sensitive data but it will stop them from ever viewing it in a short matter of time (depending on how well you selected your key). Since you are on a network, a firewall isn't much used to you as the main server will be attacked first, not a node on the network. The main server should be protected by a firewall, however. Also, because you are on a network it is hard to prevent the admin from viewing your network access. They will be able to see your packets in detail if they wanted to. You can prevent them from interpreting the data in those packets by using encryption. Good luck. --Sapient2003 - sapient@sapient2003.com
&quot;The worst insecurity is beleiving you are too secure.&quot;

 

[SteveTheGeek]

I suppose if the gentleman is already running ZoneAlarm et. al. on his workstation, there isn't very much IT control of the desktop in the first place.

That notwithstanding, stealthdesired, given the expected audience of this forum, you're in effect asking a bunch of police how to rob a 7-11 and not get caught - don't expect too much sympathy or cooperation here. It your company's PC, provided for you to use in the course of your employment, so needing to keep system administrators from ever looking at your files would seem unnecessary and ultimately futile in any case.
-Steve

 

[Guest_imported]

Are you kidding? What you are trying to not only should get you fired(admins are there for a reason) but if you have not looked at your hire contract, it probably IS grounds for termination. If you don't trust the admin, as was suggested you need to speak with their supervisor. I don't know about the rest of the guys, but most techs/admins have much more pressing concerns than your data. And integrity usually goes along with the job. Take the admin aside and talk with them about it. I assure you that your data is not that important or interesting. Follow company policy, it's there for a reason. And speaking as one of the cops, this is a warning, don't make me give you the ticket.

 

[A5k]

I'll agree that *IF* stealthdesired is trying to get around system policies, he/she should run into trouble. However, is it an infringement on him/her to say &quot;you can't encrypt data&quot; if there is nothing stated in the company policies? Stealthdesired may need encryption on some sensitive documents that are company property. Let's not assume that stealthdesired is trying to do anything problematic, doing so sells us and the our end-users short.

-a5k