From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #700 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Monday, September 13 1999 Volume 02 : Number 700 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] IBD Weekend Review RE: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy Re: [CANSLIM] IBD Weekend Review Re: [CANSLIM] Fw: CLFY - possible breakout from cup & handle Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy Re: [CANSLIM] IBD Weekend Review Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 18:21:45 -0700 From: Earl Setser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] IBD Weekend Review I have noticed this also, in fact, many of the stocks had "D" ratings a few months ago. I feel this is caused by the underperformance of small cap stocks over the last few years. Small cap and even mid-cap funds have not had great performance compared to large cap funds over the last 3 years. Therefore, these funds are not rated as "good" funds by IBD, and ownership by these funds reduced the IBD sponsor rank. I have noticed that many of these stocks have moved from "D" to "C" ratings as small caps have made some small comeback since spring. Personally, I use anything from A-C as acceptable since most of the stocks I look at are smaller stocks. In fact, very few stocks I look at have a B rating, and I'm not sure I've ever seen a stock with an A. I have adjusted my views on this from "D" is acceptable to "C" is acceptable as most of the stocks have moved up. Good luck. At 10:54 AM 9/12/99 -0700, you wrote: >In Friday's IBD "Weekend Graphic Review", I noticed that of >the 28 displays shown...2 had a Sponsor Rank of "B", 19 a >Sponsor Rank of "C" and 7 a Sponsor Rank of "D". > >I'm not sure what to make of this featuring of such low >sponsorship companies. I would appreciate hearing others >comments. > >In IBD's 48 module tutorial, specifically Module 21 on >"Institutional Sponsorship", it says to "look for stocks >with an "A" or "B" Sponsorship rank"...and then of the >stocks they feature, 93% have ranks of "C" and "D". > > > >Also, another inconsistency: > >In Friday's (9/10/99) IBD, on the page 1 article in the >"Investor's Corner", Fleckenstein states that "The price >should break out of the handle on strong volume, at least >40% to 50% above the 50-day average of a stock's trading >volume." Then the next issue of IBD dated Monday (9/13/99) >in the same column, Flecknstein states "The new high should >come on a healthy pickup in volume, at least 50% above the >50-day average of the stock's daily trading activity." > >...well , is it at least 40% or at least 50% of a stock's >50-day ATV? > >For those newbies who try to follow the CANSLIM to rigidly, >the above type of inconsistencies can be very confusing... >comments anyone? > >Ray "Ziggy" Wroblewski > > > > > >- > > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 21:16:09 -0400 From: "Ron Russell" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy I recently downloaded and installed Jammer on my PC. Unfortunately it is not fully functional under NT which I am running. Specifically under NT it does not monitor your network connection for unauthorized access attempts. This is my biggest concern since I am also running a Cable Modem. Does anyone know of any security products which are fully functional under NT that do monitor your network connection? Thanks, Ron - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Johan Van Houtven Sent: Sunday, September 12, 1999 6:15 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy If you are serious about protecting your PC and privacy then IMHO you should read this: http://www.ix.de/ct/english/99/17/088/ After reading this I played around with a program called 'Jammer' that detects other people trying to access your PC. And around 2:35 AM last night I recieved an alert than someone tried to get into my PC (but couldn't ofcourse). So let this be a warning to all of you. If they are scanning remote places as where I'm at, they are bound to be scanning you guys in the USA much more frequently. Johan === - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 21:30:04 -0400 From: "Surindra Singh" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy - ----- Original Message ----- From: Johan Van Houtven To: Sent: Sunday, September 12, 1999 6:14 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy > If you are serious about protecting your PC and privacy then IMHO you > should read this: > > http://www.ix.de/ct/english/99/17/088/ > > After reading this I played around with a program called 'Jammer' that > detects other people trying to access your PC. And around 2:35 AM last > night I recieved an alert than someone tried to get into my PC (but > couldn't ofcourse). Must be Tom ;-) > > So let this be a warning to all of you. If they are scanning remote places > as where I'm at, they are bound to be scanning you guys in the USA much > more frequently. > > > > > > Johan === > > > > - > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 21:43:21 -0400 From: "Surindra Singh" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] IBD Weekend Review Here are some of the stocks with A ratings: ACTM AEPI AFCX ATMI ACDO ACTU ADPT ADBE ADVP ADIC ADMS ADVS AGX ALX ALTR DOX AHC AWR AMN AMGN ADI ANEN ADRX AXE ANTC APA AAPL AMAT AMCC APLX ARA ARDT AGY ABFS ATSN ARTC SIDE ATML AUDC VOX AVNT BCX BMCS BMI BFT BRR BELFA BELFB BHE BEM BEST BCHE BGEN BVF BBOX BCC BWG BFCI CBA BRCM BVSN BRCD BBRC BOBJ CBS CTP CNYF CTS CCBL CS CACI CAMP CWT CPN CACS CATH CACOA CLS CNTO CHA MPH CKFR CAKE CHRX CHIR CHD CSCO CITC CTXS CLFY CLKB CCU COHR CELS CTV CWBC CA CMVT CNXT CTWS CUO GLW CPWM COX CXR CMOS CREE CBXC CY CYTC DIIG DAKT DGN DELL DLTK DRTE DVN DTPI DITC DCR EGG EMC ESST ETEK ELBO EFII EMLX EI ENZ ENZN EOT EQT ESP XLSW XLTC EXPD FTUS FFOH FRTE FOSL KIDE FFTI GAEO GALT GTW GHW GIC GNSS GCTI GENZ GON GP GGG GUAR GUC GSY HIFN HAIN HQ HDL HRD HC HLIT HAUP HWP HBCCA HH HOTT IH IBIS IIVI ILN IMN BLUD IMNX IMPH N INSUA ISN ISYS IDTI INTC INTL ICPT ICUB INSS IRF TRAV IVX JDSU JBL JAKK JEFF KSWS KEI KCP KMG KING KARE KOFX KRON LADF LRCX LE LATD LGTO LFT LXK LTBG LAD LCE LD LU MGG MYR MACR MGIC MAP MAPS MLP MEAD MSS MEDI MBRS MBIA MRCY MERQ MRET MTNT MCRL MCHP MUSE MU MCRS MSFT MSTR MRS MSEX MLNM MNMD MCSW MNDA MINI MNC MOT NCOG NVR NLCS NATI NSM NCI NEO NTAP NECB NMR NOBL NOK NTK NOVL OXE OSBC CTAC OCLI OPMR ORCL ORBK PFFB PMCS PSUN PRLX PNNW PPLS PERC PRGN PTIX PSEM PERI PVSW PFX PRY PKX PLCM PLMD POWI PWAV PRRC PMI PR PTNX PRGX PRGS PSDI PVY PTZ QLTI QGENF QLGC QCOM RFMD RADS RATL REIN RIMM RSC RCBK RHT ROAD RPC ROG SBSE SDLI SJW SGA SFP SANM SAPE SCNYA SCNYB SAWS SCSC SFA SCTT SAF SEG SELA SMTC SQAA SEBL SILI SMOD SLR SWWC TRK SRT SFIN STN STM SGY SUMX SUNW SUNQ SRDX SYBS SYMC SIND THQI TLB TAN TAROF TCN TSO TXN TIF TBL TLGD TNI TXCC TWRI TSI TQNT TUR TWTR TYC UCBH USC USM USFC CLEC ULTE UNFY UGS UIS UWR UTR UVN VISX VCI VVTV VRI VERA VRSN VRTS VRTY VIA VNWK VTSS WFSI WAT WJ EWD WWCA WON WHJI OATS WSM WGO WIZTF XETA XLNX XIRC XOMD YZC ZBRA ZOLL ZOMX I hope you will have a wonderful week.... Regards Surindra - ----- Original Message ----- From: Earl Setser To: Sent: Sunday, September 12, 1999 9:21 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] IBD Weekend Review > I have noticed this also, in fact, many of the stocks had "D" ratings a few > months ago. I feel this is caused by the underperformance of small cap > stocks over the last few years. Small cap and even mid-cap funds have not > had great performance compared to large cap funds over the last 3 years. > Therefore, these funds are not rated as "good" funds by IBD, and ownership > by these funds reduced the IBD sponsor rank. I have noticed that many of > these stocks have moved from "D" to "C" ratings as small caps have made > some small comeback since spring. Personally, I use anything from A-C as > acceptable since most of the stocks I look at are smaller stocks. In fact, > very few stocks I look at have a B rating, and I'm not sure I've ever seen > a stock with an A. I have adjusted my views on this from "D" is acceptable > to "C" is acceptable as most of the stocks have moved up. Good luck. > At 10:54 AM 9/12/99 -0700, you wrote: > >In Friday's IBD "Weekend Graphic Review", I noticed that of > >the 28 displays shown...2 had a Sponsor Rank of "B", 19 a > >Sponsor Rank of "C" and 7 a Sponsor Rank of "D". > > > >I'm not sure what to make of this featuring of such low > >sponsorship companies. I would appreciate hearing others > >comments. > > > >In IBD's 48 module tutorial, specifically Module 21 on > >"Institutional Sponsorship", it says to "look for stocks > >with an "A" or "B" Sponsorship rank"...and then of the > >stocks they feature, 93% have ranks of "C" and "D". > > > > > > > >Also, another inconsistency: > > > >In Friday's (9/10/99) IBD, on the page 1 article in the > >"Investor's Corner", Fleckenstein states that "The price > >should break out of the handle on strong volume, at least > >40% to 50% above the 50-day average of a stock's trading > >volume." Then the next issue of IBD dated Monday (9/13/99) > >in the same column, Flecknstein states "The new high should > >come on a healthy pickup in volume, at least 50% above the > >50-day average of the stock's daily trading activity." > > > >...well , is it at least 40% or at least 50% of a stock's > >50-day ATV? > > > >For those newbies who try to follow the CANSLIM to rigidly, > >the above type of inconsistencies can be very confusing... > >comments anyone? > > > >Ray "Ziggy" Wroblewski > > > > > > > > > > > >- > > > > > > > > > - > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 22:01:55 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Fw: CLFY - possible breakout from cup & handle Strange, the copy that I got from majordomo was correct, anyway clipping the section again. The problem appears to lie with your reception, as the copy I got is complete. First, the basics: RS 96, EPS 97, GRS 91. Management ownership 18+ACU-, funds 25+ACU- (too high), A/D is A, as is Timeliness. ADV is 464,300. U/D is 1.1. No debt, ROE is only 11+ACU- (poor). SMR is A. Five year earnings growth is 46+ACU-, forecast for current year is +-119+ACU-, next year +-43+ACU-. Top five in group (APLX, UNFY, MGIC, PERI, FRTE) all have RS of 99, so it's not in the top five. However the best EPS in the top five is only 77, so a minor change in RS will vault it to the +ACM-1 position. There is a small short position (0.9 days ADV). Last four qtrs earnings were +-800+ACU-, +-400+ACU-, +-267+ACU-, and +-180+ACU-. These large gains were easy as comparative year was so low. However, sales were +-58+ACU-, +-50+ACU-, +-75+ACU-, and +-76+ACU-. So sales growth was strongest in the latest two qtrs, and Tom Worley stkguru+AEA-netside.net chat with me at ICQ +ACM- 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - -----Original Message----- From: wroblewski+AEA-uswest.net +ADw-wroblewski+AEA-uswest.net+AD4- To: canslim+AEA-lists.xmission.com +ADw-canslim+AEA-lists.xmission.com+AD4- Date: Sunday, September 12, 1999 12:53 PM Subject: Re: +AFs-CANSLIM+AF0- Fw: CLFY - possible breakout from cup +ACY- handle Thank you Tom, Your analysis is very helpful to me. One note, in one of your paragraphs, a number of earnings and sales figures did not appear. The paragraph is listed below...please note lines 5, 10, 11 and 12. Best regards, Ziggy Tom Worley wrote: +AD4- First, the basics: RS 96, EPS 97, GRS 91. Management +AD4- ownership 18+ACU-, funds 25+ACU- (too high), A/D is A, as is +AD4- Timeliness. ADV is 464,300. U/D is 1.1. No debt, ROE is only +AD4- 11+ACU- (poor). SMR is A. Five year earnings growth is 46+ACU-, +AD4- forecast for current year is +118AJQ-, next year +ACU-. Top five +AD4- in group (APLX, UNFY, MGIC, PERI, FRTE) all have RS of 99, +AD4- so it's not in the top five. However the best EPS in the top +AD4- five is only 77, so a minor change in RS will vault it to +AD4- the +ACM-1 position. There is a small short position (0.9 days +AD4- ADV). Last four qtrs earnings were +800AJQ-, +400AJQ-, +264AJQ-, and +AD4- +180AJQ-. These large gains were easy as comparative year was +AD4- so low. However, sales were +ACU-, +ACU-, +ACU-, and +ACU-. So +AD4- sales growth was strongest in the latest two qtrs, and +AD4- current qtr should enjoy a favorable comparison. +AD4- +AD4- +ADw-Big snip+AD4- +AD4- Tom Worley +AD4- stkguru+AEA-netside.net +AD4- chat with me at ICQ +ACM- 5568838 +AD4- get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html +AD4- +AD4- - - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 03:41:55 +0000 (GMT) From: musicant@pacbell.net (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy On Mon, 13 Sep 1999 00:14:52 +0200, you wrote: :If you are serious about protecting your PC and privacy then IMHO you :should read this: : :http://www.ix.de/ct/english/99/17/088/ : :After reading this I played around with a program called 'Jammer' that :detects other people trying to access your PC. And around 2:35 AM last :night I recieved an alert than someone tried to get into my PC (but :couldn't ofcourse). : :So let this be a warning to all of you. If they are scanning remote = places :as where I'm at, they are bound to be scanning you guys in the USA much :more frequently. : :Johan =3D=3D=3D I am told by a guy who ought to know that my PC is accessible by hackers unless I set up a firewall. He assures me that my habit of turning off my PC when not in use is a wise practice. He says someone can get access to my files, destroy my hard drives, set up accounts in my operating system (I'm Dan Musicant, but they could set up an account for a different person), etc. Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 21:59:28 -0700 From: Earl Setser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] IBD Weekend Review I'm sorry. I was discussing Sponsor Rank or Institutional Ratings. Maybe this wasn't clear in my response. A quick scan of your list makes me think you were referring to something else. A quick look at last Tuesday's IBD and your first four stocks: ACTM - C AEPI - D AFCX - C ATMI - C So you must be referring to something other than Sponsor Rank. In fact, a quick scan of the NASDAQ tables for stocks starting with "A" (about 180 stocks) yields only three stocks with an "A" Sponsor rank, and about 40 stocks with a "B". You can see why few stocks that meet other CANSLIM criteria would have an "A". At 09:43 PM 9/12/99 -0400, you wrote: > > >Here are some of the stocks with A ratings: > >ACTM >AEPI >AFCX >ATMI >ACDO >ACTU >ADPT >ADBE >ADVP >ADIC >ADMS >ADVS >AGX >ALX >ALTR >DOX >AHC >AWR >AMN >AMGN >ADI >ANEN >ADRX >AXE >ANTC >APA >AAPL >AMAT >AMCC >APLX >ARA >ARDT >AGY >ABFS >ATSN >ARTC >SIDE >ATML >AUDC >VOX >AVNT >BCX >BMCS >BMI >BFT >BRR >BELFA >BELFB >BHE >BEM >BEST >BCHE >BGEN >BVF >BBOX >BCC >BWG >BFCI >CBA >BRCM >BVSN >BRCD >BBRC >BOBJ >CBS >CTP >CNYF >CTS >CCBL >CS >CACI >CAMP >CWT >CPN >CACS >CATH >CACOA >CLS >CNTO >CHA >MPH >CKFR >CAKE >CHRX >CHIR >CHD >CSCO >CITC >CTXS >CLFY >CLKB >CCU >COHR >CELS >CTV >CWBC >CA >CMVT >CNXT >CTWS >CUO >GLW >CPWM >COX >CXR >CMOS >CREE >CBXC >CY >CYTC >DIIG >DAKT >DGN >DELL >DLTK >DRTE >DVN >DTPI >DITC >DCR >EGG >EMC >ESST >ETEK >ELBO >EFII >EMLX >EI >ENZ >ENZN >EOT >EQT >ESP >XLSW >XLTC >EXPD >FTUS >FFOH >FRTE >FOSL >KIDE >FFTI >GAEO >GALT >GTW >GHW >GIC >GNSS >GCTI >GENZ >GON >GP >GGG >GUAR >GUC >GSY >HIFN >HAIN >HQ >HDL >HRD >HC >HLIT >HAUP >HWP >HBCCA >HH >HOTT >IH >IBIS >IIVI >ILN >IMN >BLUD >IMNX >IMPH >N >INSUA >ISN >ISYS >IDTI >INTC >INTL >ICPT >ICUB >INSS >IRF >TRAV >IVX >JDSU >JBL >JAKK >JEFF >KSWS >KEI >KCP >KMG >KING >KARE >KOFX >KRON >LADF >LRCX >LE >LATD >LGTO >LFT >LXK >LTBG >LAD >LCE >LD >LU >MGG >MYR >MACR >MGIC >MAP >MAPS >MLP >MEAD >MSS >MEDI >MBRS >MBIA >MRCY >MERQ >MRET >MTNT >MCRL >MCHP >MUSE >MU >MCRS >MSFT >MSTR >MRS >MSEX >MLNM >MNMD >MCSW >MNDA >MINI >MNC >MOT >NCOG >NVR >NLCS >NATI >NSM >NCI >NEO >NTAP >NECB >NMR >NOBL >NOK >NTK >NOVL >OXE >OSBC >CTAC >OCLI >OPMR >ORCL >ORBK >PFFB >PMCS >PSUN >PRLX >PNNW >PPLS >PERC >PRGN >PTIX >PSEM >PERI >PVSW >PFX >PRY >PKX >PLCM >PLMD >POWI >PWAV >PRRC >PMI >PR >PTNX >PRGX >PRGS >PSDI >PVY >PTZ >QLTI >QGENF >QLGC >QCOM >RFMD >RADS >RATL >REIN >RIMM >RSC >RCBK >RHT >ROAD >RPC >ROG >SBSE >SDLI >SJW >SGA >SFP >SANM >SAPE >SCNYA >SCNYB >SAWS >SCSC >SFA >SCTT >SAF >SEG >SELA >SMTC >SQAA >SEBL >SILI >SMOD >SLR >SWWC >TRK >SRT >SFIN >STN >STM >SGY >SUMX >SUNW >SUNQ >SRDX >SYBS >SYMC >SIND >THQI >TLB >TAN >TAROF >TCN >TSO >TXN >TIF >TBL >TLGD >TNI >TXCC >TWRI >TSI >TQNT >TUR >TWTR >TYC >UCBH >USC >USM >USFC >CLEC >ULTE >UNFY >UGS >UIS >UWR >UTR >UVN >VISX >VCI >VVTV >VRI >VERA >VRSN >VRTS >VRTY >VIA >VNWK >VTSS >WFSI >WAT >WJ >EWD >WWCA >WON >WHJI >OATS >WSM >WGO >WIZTF >XETA >XLNX >XIRC >XOMD >YZC >ZBRA >ZOLL >ZOMX > >I hope you will have a wonderful week.... > >Regards > > >Surindra > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Earl Setser >To: >Sent: Sunday, September 12, 1999 9:21 PM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] IBD Weekend Review > > >> I have noticed this also, in fact, many of the stocks had "D" ratings a >few >> months ago. I feel this is caused by the underperformance of small cap >> stocks over the last few years. Small cap and even mid-cap funds have not >> had great performance compared to large cap funds over the last 3 years. >> Therefore, these funds are not rated as "good" funds by IBD, and ownership >> by these funds reduced the IBD sponsor rank. I have noticed that many of >> these stocks have moved from "D" to "C" ratings as small caps have made >> some small comeback since spring. Personally, I use anything from A-C as >> acceptable since most of the stocks I look at are smaller stocks. In >fact, >> very few stocks I look at have a B rating, and I'm not sure I've ever seen >> a stock with an A. I have adjusted my views on this from "D" is >acceptable >> to "C" is acceptable as most of the stocks have moved up. Good luck. >> At 10:54 AM 9/12/99 -0700, you wrote: >> >In Friday's IBD "Weekend Graphic Review", I noticed that of >> >the 28 displays shown...2 had a Sponsor Rank of "B", 19 a >> >Sponsor Rank of "C" and 7 a Sponsor Rank of "D". >> > >> >I'm not sure what to make of this featuring of such low >> >sponsorship companies. I would appreciate hearing others >> >comments. >> > >> >In IBD's 48 module tutorial, specifically Module 21 on >> >"Institutional Sponsorship", it says to "look for stocks >> >with an "A" or "B" Sponsorship rank"...and then of the >> >stocks they feature, 93% have ranks of "C" and "D". >> > >> > >> > >> >Also, another inconsistency: >> > >> >In Friday's (9/10/99) IBD, on the page 1 article in the >> >"Investor's Corner", Fleckenstein states that "The price >> >should break out of the handle on strong volume, at least >> >40% to 50% above the 50-day average of a stock's trading >> >volume." Then the next issue of IBD dated Monday (9/13/99) >> >in the same column, Flecknstein states "The new high should >> >come on a healthy pickup in volume, at least 50% above the >> >50-day average of the stock's daily trading activity." >> > >> >...well , is it at least 40% or at least 50% of a stock's >> >50-day ATV? >> > >> >For those newbies who try to follow the CANSLIM to rigidly, >> >the above type of inconsistencies can be very confusing... >> >comments anyone? >> > >> >Ray "Ziggy" Wroblewski >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >- >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> - >> >> > > >- > > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 13:12:56 EDT From: SimbaLnKng@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy Ron, Do you know anywhere where i can download Jammer?? Thanks Rob - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 19:52:11 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy Rob, Don't have the site bookmarked any longer. I also want to say I do NOT recommend this program in any way. I removed it from my setup after I played with it for a while. Try a search at Altavista.com to locate the file/site. Johan At 01:12 PM 9/13/99 EDT, you wrote: >Ron, > > Do you know anywhere where i can download Jammer?? > >Thanks > >Rob > >- > > Johan === - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 15:38:40 -0500 From: "MindSpring User" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy Go to www.download.com and search that site for Jammer. DSquires - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, September 13, 1999 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy > Ron, > > Do you know anywhere where i can download Jammer?? > > Thanks > > Rob > > - > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 21:24:10 -0400 From: "Patrick Riggins" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-CS: Protecting your PC and your privacy > I am told by a guy who ought to know that my PC is accessible by hackers > unless I set up a firewall. He assures me that my habit of turning off > my PC when not in use is a wise practice. > > He says someone can get access to my files, destroy my hard drives, set > up accounts in my operating system (I'm Dan Musicant, but they could set > up an account for a different person), etc. Depending on your operating system and the particular software you are running, it is possible for someone to gain access to your machine over the Internet just by sending you an email. For example, if you are using Outlook Express 5 and Windows 2000 (beta 3), then someone can gain access just by you highlighting the subject line in the email, not even opening it. My point? Just about anyone can gain access while you are online if they are determined and smart enough. There are some basic things you can do that decrease the odds and make yourself less visible while you are online. One thing is to get your connection scanned. You can request this at the following site for free: http://www.secure-me.net/ You will need to know your IP address (if on dialup, it probably changes every time you call) and keep your connection up until it can get scanned. It usually takes under thirty minutes to an hour to get to you in the queue. The check is usually done in about ten minutes. You then get an email describing your vulnerabilities and how you might can correct them. - -- Patrick - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #700 ***************************** To unsubscribe to canslim-digest, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe canslim-digest" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.