Good PC security practices AD 2017

could just be something like teamviewer or the built in windows one

>>61665018
Just buy a mac. Shit just works

>>61665055
I don't use any remote control software myself. I have a basic Windows home network, spanning a Windows PC, a Windows tablet, an old Windows netbook (almost never turned on) and a router/modem with some folder sharing. I am the sole user of that network.

>>61665058
Macs don't have screens with pen pressure. And my most used software doesn't run on Mac. I'd have to give up a lot of software.

>>61665058
Does Apple have good individual customer support?

>>61665018
>1914
So you have been using computers before they existed and you're over 100 years old? Damn you deserve a medal or something.

>>61665365
Thank you. Indeed, I feel like I deserve it.

GNU/Linux with Common Sense doesn't have this problem

>>61665429
This

>>61665429
>>61665494
I have tried various distros Linux several times in my life and I failed each time. The last one was CentOS three years ago. The Internet didn't work on it after the installation (on a VirtualBox VM) and NO ONE wanted to tell me how to make it work. I have considered buying customer support licence from RedHat but it costs like thousands of dollars. Even if I made the Internet work, Linux is made for keyboards, not GUI with touch screen. It doesn't have pen pressure drivers for Surface Pro. What is a Surface Pro without pen pressure? A terribly overpriced Chinese tablet.

>>61665018
Close your browser and any applications that are connected to the web. Open a shell and type netstat -an. Copy the foreign ip addresses to a list and whois them. Do this again whenever you boot up again until you find something suspicious. Once found Google: (ip address) malware. You can usually find a solution to remove it.

I'm thinking that maybe these days everyone should have a separate PC for browsing the Internet and another (offline) for everything else. It's going to be very hard to do anything useful without the Internet but that's maybe the only viable solution.

>>61665651
I will try it. Thank you.
Would it work if the attacker connects only rarely?
Would it work against rootkits?

Alright. Thanks, anons, for letting me vent my frustration. I will follow your 'nestat' advice. I will also try to restructure my computer usage for offline work (with a separate machine for browsing the Internet). Polite sage.

If it's a rootkit you're out of luck unless you can pick out which drivers shouldn't be there for regular malware observe suspicious traffic and connections out of strange ports

>>61665996
Thanks.