Bump for "Pleeeease?"

Install gentoo.

>>7003069

I acknowledge that that is a very good place to start, as I presume it will give me the capability to work in whatever security measures I want with little trouble.

But that doesn't tell me jack shit about security measures.

What do you want to protect against?

>>7003092
Yes it is. It will take you at least 3 months to setup your internet connection on gentoo. Hence you will be safe for longer than any other distros.

>>7002985
Never connect to the internet.

Done.

>>7003127
What about someone who sits in front of my computer, I want to protect it from that too

>What do you want to protect against?

Basically? I'd like to be able to protect my computer from most concentrated hacking or observation attacks.

Obviously, no system is perfect, and will be cracked eventually, but, I'd like to be able to at least hold out against anyone who's just 'interested'.

Common Sense 2010. It's amazing, I swear.

>>7003139
Set up a 30 character long password of letters, symbols and numbers to access anything and everything.

Also, encrypt everything. Get an HDD equipped with Hardware Encryption. Although if you forget your password, you're fucked. It's not like software encryption like TrueCrypt or something.

>>7003139
>implying anyone who breaks into your house will know how to use gentoo

>>7003164
What if they have a cluster of 2000 PS3s to crack my encryption?

>>7003181
It'll take a few centuries to brute force it, no matter how many Cell/PPC processors they have working on it.

>>7003194
But, what if they have a lot of time....

>>7003127
What if I get mugged by a hacker while transporting vital data for my computer on a USB drive on my keyring?

>>7003198

Implant a heart monitor into your body and if it ever flatlines make it to where it sends a signal to your computer to wipe your hard drive

and stop looking at CP

I should have known this wouldn't be any help >.>

>>7003213
I doubt a mugger is sophisticated enough to get around the most basic password setups and won't know how to bruteforce it, with that said use a basic encryption program. I believe TrueCrypt works for USBs.

>>7003233
tl;dr

your information isn't valuable, don't do illegal shit

>>7003213
https://www.ironkey.com/

>>7003238
BUUUUT, the Mugger is a hacker, I already said that!

>>7003198
They won't be able to break it, trust me.

It won't be a few centuries either, try several millennia.

You'd be lucky of humans are even around in 30... years.


A password of that length with varying characters is fucking crazily hard to crack.
They will never put the resources in it to crack someones TC container because you were downloading CP or whatever it is you are trying to hide.
And if you aren't downloading the CPs, they'll certainly not give a shit about you. (no offence)

Simple rule: don't make enemies with governments and they won't care.

>>7003254
What if I'm trying to do it on a budget... then what?

Well you can make your computer very very secure even the nsa wouldn't be able to crack it. However there is a balance between security, usability, convenience and cost. Any hyper secure setup is going to be costly and time consuming and your data will be far less accessible.

>>7003269
They won't give enough of a shit if they only think you downloaded something....

If you're keeping lolis in the basement, the partyv& will have enough time to crack it.

Or if you're Osama Bin Laden...

>>7003233
Protip: No computer is secure. EVER.
Computers were always and will always be designed for functionality and features. Not designed for security. You want to make your computer as secure as possible?

Turn it off.
Seriously, the only truly secure computer is one that's turned off.

Then if you want to go apeshit, put it in a 10 foot thick cement vault with four different 30 character/symbol/number password lock on the outside of it.

>>7003274
Then nothing you have is worth securing to such an extent.

If you're worried, go buy a Lenovo ThinkPad with one of their Hardware Encrypted HDDs. Get it with a fingerprint scanner.

Shut the fuck up and leave.

>>7003287
and a big dog outside... with a smaller dog guarding the big dog

>>7003301
In a house with curtains.

>How do I make my computer as secure as motherfucking possible.

Unplug it. Encase it in reinforced concrete, and dump it off a ship to the bottom of the Marianas trench (or any other subduction zone, really) to be pulled into the mantle and turned back into raw materials.

Between that and no security at all is what you're actually looking for. What, exactly, is your goal?

>>7003301
Wouldn't you want each dog to be progressively bigger to guard the smaller dog infront of it?

>>7003326
Don't you think it would be easier to just dump it in a volcano? I mean it essentially gives the same results.

>>7003284
They still won't crack it.
The amount of combinations and the unknowns of how big the actual password will outlast any poster on this board.

You can doubly fuck them by placing yet another 30+ character passworded container inside, and another, and another, and another.

The only way they are getting your password is via hardware, either through a reflashed BIOS or spyware / malware.
Or of course, beating the shit out of you via "invisible" methods until you release the password. (shocks, chemicals, etc)

>>7003269

>>7003327
If you put the biggest dog on the end, if someone found a way to bypass the previous dogs they'd just have to punt the chihuahua and walk into your bomb shelter with impunity

>>7003334

You haven't seen a caldera that's not undergoing an eruption, have you? Cold hard rock is what you see. Like leaving it out on the sidewalk.

>>7003343
That's where Hardware Encryption comes in. If it's software, you have a chance of reflashing the BIOS. If it's encrypted via the Hardware though...
They're fucked.

>>7003385
I would think heading to an active volcano and dumping it in would've been implied.

>>7003413

Fine, you go walk up to the edge of an erupting volcano's caldera. I'll wait right here.

>>7003424
>implying I wouldn't rent a helicopter and fly over it, and dumping it in from there
Don't watch much Discovery Channel do you?

>>7003443
>implying that you have enough money to rent a helicopter to fly over an erupting volcano.
>implying that you'd ever find a pilot silly enough to do it.

HEY OP.

Listen to these. Starting from the beginning. It starts out good for novice listeners, but after 100 or so shows starts to get kind of intermediate. This fucker is right 99% of the time, and will correct himself the next episode when he's not.

http://www.grc.com/securitynow.htm

>>7003464
>implying chartering a bot to go over the Marianas trench and encasing a computer in concrete would be significantly cheaper
>implying there aren't pilots that do that regularly for tourists in Hawaii

>>7003469
Man, that goes back to 2005. Although, a lot of the stuff they do talk about is timeless.

>>7003490
>boat**

>>7003469

Awesome podcast is Awesome :)

>>7003469

He is a fucking tool. He said that refusing connections on a port that you don't offer services on is somehow less secure than silently dropping packets.

It's been about 15 years since he said that, and nobody's ever been able to break into any computer that way.

>>7003490
>implying that the pilots in hawaii fly directly over Mauna Loa when it's erupting.
>implying that my way is less feasible.

>>7003522
Refusing to accept a service on a port alerts a scanner to your existence. Silently dropping packets does not. If you want to be invisible, then Silently dropping packets is the way to go.

Online Armor is the best free firewall

>>7003545
It is less feasible. You could miss the marianas trench easily with the currents. And it doesn't have to be erupting, it just has to be active enough to have magma flow reaching the surface.

>>7003557
This.

Saying "OH HEY, I DON'T LET PORT X GO THROUGH" is like telling the officer than breaking your door down is the incorrect method to unlock the door.

>>7003522
>>7003557

Fucking owned

>>7003566
COMODO was here.
You're a faggot.

>>7003557
>implying that many people don't offer at least one service that's detectable like instant messaging or bittorrent and that dropping packets on other ports makes a hill of beans difference.
>implying that people scan for random ports when scanning for bittorrent and im is more effective to determine the existence of a computer.

>>7003592
Don't be jealous.

>>7003587

see >>7003600

Owned? hardly.

>>7003608
I'm using the best free Firewall available in COMODO combined with Defense+.
Why would I be jealous?

>>7003619
Because you know Online Armor is better

>>7003600
It doesn't actually matter what's extreme, what's unfeasible, and what "most people" do. Security is security.

best online protection for your computer is disabling your network adapters.

>>7003629
I know no such thing. COMODO is clearly superior. Only a faggot like yourself can't see that.

>>7003647
The truth is making you emotional.

>>7003632
>implying that wasting time on theoretical threats is somehow productive compared to dealing with actual holes in security.

Jane is running IM. I portscan for IM on her subnet and find every computer that's running IM. Those are active computers. If I scan for random ports, I am far less likely to find available machines. Why scan for 22 when I can find shit on 5050?

>>7003712
Block application from receiving any messages from an IP other than the original one it communicated with.
Any other IPs connecting to it are automatically a threat.

Solved.

>>7003618

>implying I can see future posts
>implying everyone has those necessary ports in use right when a hacker wants in
>implying machines hackers want into will be even running them

you want a computer thats as secure as possible?

well you're in luck, the solution is to not use a computer forever, now get off the internet ya bum