Monitoring actions in XP

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I'm trying to figure out where the log files that record every action that
takes place on your computer.
Are there ways of monitoring what happens on your computers??

I would like to know for security reasons in my office.
 
Windows XP does not have this ability. There is an enormous amount of third
party software that can do this. Look for it on the Internet.
 
I beg your pardon, but put like that as a blank statement: "Windows XP does
not have this ability" this is incorrect.
XP *does* have the ability to record *certain* actions taking place on your
machine, just not *every* action.

george

Ted Zieglar said:
Windows XP does not have this ability. There is an enormous amount of
third
party software that can do this. Look for it on the Internet.
Click to expand...
 
george said:
I beg your pardon, but put like that as a blank statement: "Windows XP does
not have this ability" this is incorrect.
XP *does* have the ability to record *certain* actions taking place on your
machine, just not *every* action.

george

Windows XP does not have this ability. There is an enormous amount of
third
party software that can do this. Look for it on the Internet.
Click to expand...

The OP said he wanted to find "...log files that record every action
that takes place on your computer." Ted said that XP can't do that.
What's the problem?
Click to expand...
 
Raymond J. Johnson Jr. said:
The OP said he wanted to find "...log files that record every action
that takes place on your computer." Ted said that XP can't do that.
What's the problem?
Click to expand...

XP (as you yourself probably know very well) does have auditing capabilities
that allow you to keep track of quite a number of actions that take place on
your machine. If you ask "every action?", no, just a fair number of
important/interesting ones, as MS deemed fit to supply or as developers of
software put into their programs.
So, do you need any of the numerous 3rd party software? It just depends on
what you're after.
If one infers from the OP statement "every action": all the stuff that XP
can and cares to report (once configured) you don't need 3rd party stuff.
If you infer "every action" to mean exactly that, every bleeding thing that
might go on on your machine, you do need 3rd party stuff, because there are
plenty things going on that XP does not tell you about, simply because that
information is not exposed.

So there is no problem, just a matter of semantics and possibly how you read
the answer given.
 
Thank you all for your help, I will try some of the meathods suggested.

Is there a way to know if this third party software is installed on my
computer and someone is monitoring my actions???

Let paranoia run rampant ;)

TIU RIC
 
"Is there a way to know if this third party software is installed on my
computer and someone is monitoring my actions???"

Usually, no. These programs are designed to escape detection by employees.
And employers are entirely within their legal rights to use this software.
 
george said:
XP (as you yourself probably know very well) does have auditing capabilities
that allow you to keep track of quite a number of actions that take place on
your machine. If you ask "every action?", no, just a fair number of
important/interesting ones, as MS deemed fit to supply or as developers of
software put into their programs.
So, do you need any of the numerous 3rd party software? It just depends on
what you're after.
If one infers from the OP statement "every action": all the stuff that XP
can and cares to report (once configured) you don't need 3rd party stuff.
If you infer "every action" to mean exactly that, every bleeding thing that
might go on on your machine, you do need 3rd party stuff, because there are
plenty things going on that XP does not tell you about, simply because that
information is not exposed.

So there is no problem, just a matter of semantics and possibly how you read
the answer given.
Click to expand...
Semantics my a$$. Ted gave the correct answer. *You* said it was
incorrect. You gave additional information, which may or may not have
been useful to the OP. As far as how I read the answer, I read it as it
was written--in plain English.
 
Raymond J. Johnson Jr. said:
Semantics my a$$. Ted gave the correct answer. *You* said it was
incorrect. You gave additional information, which may or may not have been
useful to the OP. As far as how I read the answer, I read it as it was
written--in plain English.
Click to expand...

I'm sure your a$$ is fine. (it really is, isn't it?)
I implied nowhere that "possibly how you read the answer" translated into
"possibly how Raymond J. reads the answer".
Oops, maybe I'm reading it wrong again!
I could have written "possibly how one reads the answer" thus avoiding to
step on the delicate toes of Raymond J., but I didn't.
Those kind of intricacies of the plain English foreign language are far too
much for me.
Was the information useful to the OP? Who is to say?, Raymond J.?
Personally I just hope the OP doesn't rush out to spend extra money for
something that might already be provided by the system.
But hey, why should I(emphasis) bother, if he has money to burn maybe he
doesn't even care.
Maybe the fact that he also got a more differentiated piece of information
Let's just hope that Junior's a$$ is calmed down by now and that I don't
have to move to an english speaking country in order to learn how to
flawlessly read and write in plain English, without being presented with
someone's a$$

Greetings,
Mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Salutations amicale,
Met vriendelijke Groeten

george
 
Back
Top