To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It's not a good idea to install an old Acrobat reader because of the security risks
Indeed, that's what jumped out at my eyes too from the article. Acrobat Reader is well-known for all the holes it has and thus it's obviously a very bad idea to use non-recent versions. A really bad suggestion from the author!
About Foxit.. while true, it's fast and easy, I actually find the Windows version of Evince much faster. And it's completely free, too.
IMO, it's not a good idea to "clean up" Windows either. It'll always end up a half-assed job. It's impossible to know 100% that you've got everything. Hint: You probably didn't. Once a system is breached, you cannot trust it any more. Period. And yet, these articles keep encouraging it, and explaining how it can be done instead of going the safer route--reinstalling Windows. WTF?
Either find those original Windows discs, or break down and order a new set from the computer's manufacturer. Don't like it? Well, I guess that's what you get when you use and depend on proprietary, commercial software. Or go the easy route and get one of the various free BSD or Linux-based operating systems out there.
Anything is better than attempting to "clean" an infected Windows machine.
Edited 2010-10-20 17:24 UTC





Member since:
2010-06-02
It's not a good idea to install an old Acrobat reader because of the security risks, it's one of the most used vector of attack on Windows. While Foxit Reader is nice, you should mention lightweight open-source alternatives like sumatra pdf which loads faster than Acrobat and Foxit.