沒被推薦的PCPhoneHome
若我一會兒把我的膝上計算機留在汽車，并且某人偷竊了它？ 或者，消滅想法，某人打破了并且採取了我的精密新的計算機？ 它特別是在公司和國營部門發生一直，但它也是一定發生在私人個體身上。 一個人在14臺膝上計算機被竊取，認為有些專家。
But what if that stolen laptop or computer was powered up by the thief, then connected to the internet, and it sent an email back to the original owner describing where it was? And what if “someone” could then tell the police the name and address of the thief?
那是什麼 PCPhoneHome 應該做。 它花費$30，普通的一次性收費。 有窗口版本和Mac版本。 您在計算機的硬盤安裝它，并且，每當它送電子郵件到所有電子郵件您指定的計算機得到新的互聯網連接。 這發生通常，每天，并且，除非計算機被竊取它有微不足道的作用，除了告訴您它仍然運作。 但，如果計算機被竊取，那電子郵件在它的局部網絡包含重要消息包括計算機的IP地址，若有的話和電子郵件實際上被送郵件服務器特別是的IP地址。 那個IP地址可以被追蹤回到那時被聯絡到郵件服務器的用戶。
Brigadoon軟件， PCPhoneHome，諾言製作商幫助以追蹤計算機和與警察聯繫任務以那信息。 如此，為價格的$30，您買也許讓您的計算機回到的保險單，假設， Brigadoon實際上將接聽他們的電話并且追蹤個人計算機，并且警察將需要時間檢索個人計算機。
我下載了三個試驗拷貝：
跑Windows XP的膝上計算機：
版本3.0是為一次30天試驗設定的「標準」版本。 它不認為它在景色運作，但它在XP做。 它安裝了沒有問題，我用我的便攜式計算機細節填好了表格(做，塑造， serial#，更…) 并且它立刻送了它的第一電子郵件到我指定以形式的地址。 膝上計算機由WiFi連接，并且，當我連接了它直接地到LAN它送了另一電子郵件。 由於種種原因實際上，它每次送二電子郵件，以輕微地與地址不同。 沒有問題。 So far, after three days, it works just fine.
New home-built desktop running Vista Ultimate 64-Bit:
I knew that Version 3.0 was not recommended for Vista, even though that was the standard trial download from Brigadoon Software. So I downloaded a 3.2 “upgrade” version and tried installing that, with a subsequent comedy of errors:
- First, the installation program failed to run because, according to Windows, I did not have sufficient privileges to run it even though I was logged on as administrator;
- So I clicked on the installation program’s Properties, then Compatibility, and selected “Run as Administrator;”
- Then the installation program went a lot farther, but eventually reported a different error;
- It continued past that error and put up the “registration” screen which takes data to be included in the email that PCPhoneHome sends, but because of the reported error I didn’t bother to fill out the screen;
- Nevertheless, the installer said the installation was successful, though I knew better;
- I uninstalled it (still possible until reboot), and tried again;
- Same results, so I rebooted;
- PCPhoneHome disappeared from the list in Programs and Features - it could no longer be uninstalled. This is a security feature built into PCPhoneHome;
- So I “reverted” the drive to the most recent restore point, deleted one leftover executable, and started over;
- This time, surprisingly, the installation went well. I filled out the “registration” screen and allowed it to reboot the computer.
- After logon, Windows alerted me that an “unknown” program XYZ (I won’t disclose the name here) wanted to run and asked me if that was OK;
- I said yes. Pretty soon I received the two emails. Yay!;
- Sadly, though, upon each succesive reboot, Windows continues to ask whether program XYZ can run;
- I have modified “User Account Control” (UAC) in Windows Vista so that this no longer occurs, but of course this modification is unacceptable for the long term. UAC is a pain in the ass, but it has a purpose and should be turned ON for day-to-day activities.
- I requested a technical service response by email on January 25, but so far have not received any.
Friend’s laptop running Vista Home Edition 32-Bit:
Wow I’m SO SORRY that I tried PCPhoneHome on this computer. I tried downloading the official trial version and installing that first, as most users would do. Of course it didn’t work, because that version is not for Vista, so then I downloaded the upgrade and tried to install that on top of the first install. The resulting comedy of errors totally eclipsed anything that I had encountered with the desktop installation, and it still doesn’t work. I have installed a lot of software on many different machines, but this takes the cake. I have requested a technical service response by telephone and by email, but so far have not received any.
Bottom line: I DO NOT RECOMMEND PCPhoneHome FOR VISTA.
In my opinion, it works fine on XP but is not ready for Vista yet. It phones home on only one of my two Vista installations. There is a workaround for the XYZ “unknown program” prompt at bootup, but that workaround simply trades one security risk for another. Brigadoon Software must fix that problem somehow, perhaps by getting valid “digital signatures” for their software.
Perhaps this is all my fault for installing it on both Vista systems incorrectly. But I don’t think so; I suspect anyone running Vista with UAC turned on will experience similar problems. If true, that’s an astounding failure, since:
- The most-easily-stolen computers are laptops;
- Almost all laptops sold in the last YEAR run Vista;
- UAC is turned on by default in all new Vista systems;
- Brigadoon Software had months BEFORE THAT to prepare for Vista; so
- They are about two years behind the curve and falling further behind daily.
It’s as if Brigadoon is a one- or two-person shop, too busy to take the time and do the testing necessary to make their product really install and run correctly. What happens then, I know from experience, is that you spend so much time dealing with tech service questions that you have no time to fix the product. Meanwhile you are selling more of the junky product and compounding your problems. I’m only speculating here though …
Other Issues:
- If your computer is stolen and does phone home, will Brigadoon Software actually answer their telephone and trace an email for you? When I called their telephone number this afternoon during regular business hours, I got an answering machine and no callback today. This is not what you want, because the computer may soon evaporate into the black market and never call home again. I see other remarks on the internet which indicate that this is a real question. I will update this post and add a new post when/if I hear from them regarding my pre-sales technical service problems.
- One very good thing: My computers are set up to require a password for my own logon, to prevent access to my account through the network, and also through the keyboard if the computer were to be stolen. On both the XP and the Vista desktop system, if I booted up and did NOT log on, the computer sent the email anyway. Thus if a thief were sitting at the keyboard trying various passwords, and made the mistake of connecting the computer to the internet first, the email would be on its way.
- But what if the thief didn’t connect to the internet before logging on? In another part of the FAQ document, Brigadoon goes into great detail to show how to set up a computer so that it will boot up with one account which does NOT have a password. They don’t spell out WHY we should do that, because it obviously reduces the system’s security. But I suppose if I were the thief, I might try each of the usernames on the logon screen, looking for one with no password. If found, I might start with that account, and might even use that account to connect to the internet. Obviously, that account should not have administrator privileges!
- Brigadoon makes another good point in their FAQ document: It’s important to set up a password to the BIOS of a computer, and then set the BIOS to boot first from hard disk, not floppy or CD/DVD or memory stick. This prevents a thief from using an alternate boot to simply reformat the disk and install a new operating system, thereby obliterating the PCPhoneHome program. In case YOU have a problem with the hard disk, you simply enter the password and change the BIOS back to allow boot from alternate devices. Of course the thief can still remove the hard drive and reformat it some other way, but that’s more work and by then the computer may already have phoned home.
Written by Don. Read more great feeds at is source WEBSITE
1 comment.
Read more articles on otherSoftware and vista.
- [+] Digg: Feature this article
- [+] Del.icio.us: Bookmark this article
- [+] Furl: Bookmark this article
#1. February 5th, 2008, at 3:11 AM.
Ok, I was considering buing pcphonehome for the laptops at my department but after reading your article and some others i decided against it. Its useless if there is no support organisation behind it. Do you have any suggestion about any other system to track stolen laptops?