[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Wittmann

@ qasdfdsaq

Here you are chum, see what the Sandboxie guys think about your stupid and rather dangerous comments.

The only stupid and dangerous comments here are yours. If you think me stating the truth is dangerous then you're free to enjoy your security through obscurity but I'm not going to let you spread lies and misinformation around this forum unchallenged.

As for your 'chums', nice try. It's the credibility of your statements here that is in question. Of course the producers of any application is going to try and defend their product, whether it works or not, and will not beat an analysis by an independent third party.

As I stated earlier. I see no evidence any technical review site or competent security expert has ever performed an analysis that backs up your false and unreferenced opinions. Trusting an unproven application to do what it's not supposed to do based on the ignorant assumptions of an anonymous forum post is dangerous and stupid as you like to keep saying.

---------- Post added at 14:12 ---------- Previous post was at 14:00 ----------

Originally Posted by mart44

I'm surprised to see such a derogatory post about Sandboxie. Most articles and posts I've ever read about it say it's a good layer of security to use. Some of these writings being made by people who seem well-qualified to judge the program. Wilders Security Forums have much discussion about Sandboxie as of course does the Sandboxie forum.

There was nothing derogatory about Sandboxie until Wittmann made it that way to deflect his own incompetencies. If you re-read the first line of my first post you'll see it refers specifically to Wittmann's claim that Microsoft's security patches are useless and Sandboxie is an adequate substitute. It is not, and even their own website makes this clear. Sandboxie does not claim it is an 'ultimate security program' that substitutes for all software updates and antivirus. In fact, they specifically claims the exact opposite.

I feel I have to say that, technical skills aside, qasdfdsaq's communication skills seem to leave a lot to be desired. There are polite ways of disagreeing without rubbishing a poster's opinions or character. An angry reaction could perhaps have been expected.

That would be because I'm autistic. Unfortunately the NHS is too broke to provide any useful support and my parents abandoned me as a baby so sorry I couldn't be the model citizen you were hoping for.

It would be good to see the points discussed on the other forums mentioned. Not to see the reactions but so that long-term Sandboxie users like me can assess the merits of what is said by various people.

The points 'discussed' are Wittmann's false and grandiose claims at the top of this thread. I'm not sure where other forums come in to this. Sandboxie did not make those claims, Wittmann did. Sandboxie does what it claims to do.* It does not do what Wittmann claims it does.

Although they should really be a bit clearer about it's weaknesses, i.e. that it cannot protect against anything that's already on your computer, including the entirety of Windows itself