Re: Anti-virus? message
Hallo Jack, On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 07:42:13 -0500GMT (22-3-2011, 13:42 , where I live), you wrote: JSL I get this warning every time I attach something to an JSL email. Have you got an plug-in for virus scanner installed with TB? -- Groetjes, Roelof Moderators - I guess everyone has to get off welfare sometime. http://www.voormijalleen.nl/ The Bat! 5.0.0.151 RC1 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6002 Service Pack 2 5 pop3 accounts, 3 imap account OTFE disabled Quad Core 2.4GHz 4 GB RAM pgppcPqOr5gCX.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-virus? message
Hello Roelof, On Tuesday, March 22, 2011 you wrote: RO Hallo Jack, RO On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 07:42:13 -0500GMT (22-3-2011, 13:42 , where I RO live), you wrote: JSL I get this warning every time I attach something to an JSL email. RO Have you got an plug-in for virus scanner installed with TB? Not that I'm aware of. How would I find out? -- Jack LaRosa Using The Bat! ver: 4.2.42. Running Windows XP Pro ver 5 build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-virus? message
Hallo Jack, On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 08:56:16 -0500GMT (22-3-2011, 14:56 , where I live), you wrote: RO Have you got an plug-in for virus scanner installed with TB? JSL Not that I'm aware of. How would I find out? options - preferences - virus/trojan alert - anti virus -- Groetjes, Roelof Phone your Moderator at 3 am. for free taglines...!!! http://www.voormijalleen.nl/ The Bat! 5.0.0.151 RC1 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6002 Service Pack 2 5 pop3 accounts, 3 imap account OTFE disabled Quad Core 2.4GHz 4 GB RAM pgppH7pcdX9w1.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-virus? message
Hello Roelof, On Tuesday, March 22, 2011 you wrote: RO Hallo Jack, RO On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 08:56:16 -0500GMT (22-3-2011, 14:56 , where I RO live), you wrote: RO Have you got an plug-in for virus scanner installed with TB? JSL Not that I'm aware of. How would I find out? RO options - preferences - virus/trojan alert - anti virus Ok. Well as you can see (http://imgsrc.com/?v=untitlquq.) there does appear to be some sort of anti-virus but I have no idea of how it got there. I un-ticked the Check outgoing mail for viruses and then started another email including an attachment. The pop-up never appeared. So, I guess the problem is solved. Thank you Roelof for your help. -- Jack LaRosa Using The Bat! ver: 4.2.42. Running Windows XP Pro ver 5 build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-virus? message
Hallo Jack, On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:26:28 -0500GMT (22-3-2011, 17:26 , where I live), you wrote: JSL Ok. Well as you can see (http://imgsrc.com/?v=untitlquq.) JSL there does appear to be some sort of anti-virus but I have JSL no idea of how it got there. I'd suggest that you select and delete it. -- Groetjes, Roelof Admit nothing! Deny everything! Blame the Moderator! http://www.voormijalleen.nl/ The Bat! 5.0.0.151 RC1 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6002 Service Pack 2 5 pop3 accounts, 3 imap account OTFE disabled Quad Core 2.4GHz 4 GB RAM pgp7VR9dd7JEs.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-virus/firewall/etc - Vipre; MAXA cookie manager
Hello Gary, Saturday, September 25, 2010, 2:11:20 AM, you wrote: Another, related topic, is getting rid of cookies tracking you web activities. The best program I\'ve found is MAXA cookie manager. I've another candidate: SUPERAntiSpyware. Fast, precise, and astonishingly inexpensive. Under $20 for lifetime license--at least when I purchased it. Have been using it for several months with perfect results. Turns out anyone using the software can authorize a discount on the price. So here's the discount for everyone on TheBat list. I've pasted in the wording from the product: Please visit the following link to download your free [trial]copy: http://www.superantispyware.com Because you were referred by edgerm...@earthlink.net, you are eligible for a 25 % discount on your purchase of SUPERAntiSpyware Professional. Please use the discount code FRIEND to receive this instant discount when ordering. This is not spam e-mail. It was sent to you by edgerm...@earthlink.net. Your name has NOT been placed on any mailing nor provided to any other company as a result of this email. Great that there are good products out there! --Ed Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-virus plugin
Hi On Wednesday 13 January 2010 at 7:44:05 PM, in mid:162638507.20100113174...@gmail.com, Cesar Santos wrote: Hello TheBat users Is there any way to use anti-virus Microsoft Security Essentials in conjunction with the program TheBat!? If so how to install? You would just install and configure Microsoft Security Essentials according to Microsoft's instructions. There would be no need for any anti-virus plugins for email applications. The answer given at http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/msescan/thread/dbf58560-5b0c-4ba0-9d9b-839e80f78ceb to Does Microsoft Security Essentials automatically scan incoming/outgoing email and attachments for viruses, malware, trojans, etc.? is if you attempt to launch or save an infected attachment, MSE's real time protection will scan and stop it. It does not use the 'smoke and mirrors' approach of scanning email that some other products use which can cause issues with mail sending and receiving. See also http://thundercloud.net/infoave/tutorials/email-scanning/index.htm -- Best regards MFPA When you're through changing, you're through Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.12.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-virus plugin
Hello MFPA, Wednesday, January 13, 2010, 6:56:00 PM, you wrote: Is there any way to use anti-virus Microsoft Security Essentials in conjunction with the program TheBat!? If so how to install? M You would just install and configure Microsoft Security Essentials M according to Microsoft's instructions. There would be no need for any M anti-virus plugins for email applications. Thanks. I've already done. -- Cheers, Cesarmailto:tij...@gmail.com Current version is 4.2.12.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-virus plugin
Hello Cesar, Wednesday, January 13, 2010, 3:12:08 PM, you wrote: CS Thanks. I've already done. Can you let me know how you make out. I have it installed on a Windows 7 machine and it was very slow when scanning IMAP mail. -- Stuartmailto:skcu...@fastmail.fm Using The Bat! v4.2.19 ALPHA on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.12.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti-virus plugin
Hello Stuart, Wednesday, January 13, 2010, 10:24:31 PM, you wrote: SC Can you let me know how you make out. I have it installed on a Windows 7 machine SC and it was very slow when scanning IMAP mail. Well, I've simply installed and trusting it is going to behave smoothly. I don't have IMAP configured to TheBat!, but POP3 protocol. I am newcomer to TB! and was using Kaspersky on my desktop and now MS Security Essentials to notebook. Anyway I should give it a try to my Windows 7 x64 installed to desktop and check about how fast does it behave along MS Security Essentials. Thanks. -- Cheers, Cesarmailto:tij...@gmail.com Current version is 4.2.12.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Kevin, On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 12:19:07 -0400 GMT(4/3/2005, 11:19 AM -0600 GMT), per mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Kevin Coates wrote: I think these types of discussions help elevate awareness of both the problems and the solutions. Words of wisdom! -- Best Regards, Greg Strong Using The Bat! v3.0.9.13 Return on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi On Tuesday 5 April 2005 at 3:22:20 AM, in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Tim Casten wrote: Hello Anthony, Monday, April 4, 2005, 6:41:58 PM, you wrote: I have OE 6, and I don't see any such option. it a feature in the sp2 version And in the version I have used since 2002. I do not have SP2 installed as it effectively prevents my computer from working. -- Best regards, MFPAmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi On Wednesday 6 April 2005 at 3:38:26 PM, in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], rich gregory wrote: Considering such a system or user trusted don't make it so! If I trust somebody, they are trusted. The trust may, of course, be misplaced. -- Best regards, MFPAmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
MFPA writes: If I trust somebody, they are trusted. The trust may, of course, be misplaced. Exactly. By definition, someone must be trusted in every computer system. Whether or not that person is really trustworthy is irrelevant from a security standpoint; what matters in computer security is that people defined as trusted do not have to be audited or prevented from doing things, since by definition they never cause harm. Untrusted parties must be restricted in their actions. For example, by definition, root is trusted on a UNIX system, and Administrator is trusted on a Windows system. And anyone who can enter the correct password for these accounts is trusted by extension. The computer has no way of knowing whether a person with a correct password is truly authorized or not, because the method of checking authorization is to verify the password. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Use Avast instead. Works like a charm with The Bat!, Thunderbird and Courier. I use them all on a Win XP system... AJ *** REPLY SEPARATOR *** On 01.04.2005 at 11:05 Jeff Gaines wrote: Hello Group Apologies if this is way off topic for this group but Norton Anti Virus (AKA as Over Bearing Net Nanny, per Marck) is driving me mad, it is now putting up a dialog every ten second telling me my A/V protection is turned off, which it isn't. I have a paid for copy of F-Prot but it doesn't check email which I feel is quite important nowadays. Has anybody any recommendations for an effective A/V product that will work unobtrusively in the background and check my incoming email? I doubt I can repair Norton so I am in for a re-install but I'd like to find a decent A/V app first. Many thanks. -- Jeff Gaines Damerham Hampshire UK :Jeff_Gaines: Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html --- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 0514-0, 05.04.2005 Tested on: 06.04.2005 19:13:58 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com AJ Blisten [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing address: Ostover, N-2730 Lunner - NORWAY --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 0514-0, 05.04.2005 Tested on: 06.04.2005 19:37:20 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Mica, On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 19:11:18 +0200 GMT (05/04/2005, 00:11 +0700 GMT), Mica Mijatovic wrote: The problem is that you usuallly don't know it until being told. In the meantime, you might have shared infected files. MM In the meantime you could learn too. There are many ways. Once scorched MM you'll probably be more careful next time(s), with this source/person. Yes, I've learned. I've learned that anybody whose computer is not infected now, could be infected tomorrow. That's why I always scan attachments before opening them. Are we going in circles yet? Should this be moved to TBOT? -- Cheers, Thomas. Bassist zum Schlagzeuger: Sag mal, was issen eigentlich eine Synkope? - Schlagzeuger: Deine Eins. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 04 Apr 2005, @ @ at 16:16:37 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 15:46:50 +0200, Mica Mijatovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: /// So, it *is* about money, since the value system used to estimate a software, is directly derived, to a significant extent, from what money means/represents to someone, a particular person, or a group of them. This will be clearly shown in the mentioned message of mine; and for purely practical reasons we deal with here. Mica, because *you* think it is about money, I still see no need to discuss this any further with you; I tried to mail you off list since this is getting largely OT for quite a while. I am not interested in that kind of conversation, so please stop trying to force me into some higher social details of the story that I see no need to discuss. I've explained my position, please leave me be the way I am. I do not force you (or anyone) at all. (-: This also is not OT at all -- it is exactly in the very heart/core of the topic: evaluation of the software. You have your opinions/experiences I have mine. I listen to the yours, I think, reflect on the them, and am able hence to find something useful for me in it, in various ways. You, though, have different approach, and your attitude in conversation is leave me alone! live me alone! I don't want to hear, don't force me! So, what to do with such communication? (-: In other words, you need just an echo of your attitudes (to feel safe and accepted), while I examine things in order to find a best solution, and am ready by default to change/modify my attitude to fit with those newly discovered facts, regardless where they are coming from, and regardless even if I would receive a punch or two around a corner. So, what such so different approaches can do one with another? (-: Nothing. What a benefit of forcing things then? None. Is a communication possible then? Nope. Do I like Beckett? Yes. Is this a fine day. Yes. Shell I wheel a bit? Yes. (-: But...I'll just say this, on my way to the pleasure ground: pretty much of these tests many of us so passionately tend to accept as a facts, are paid by some money, coming from someone. (To some minds, money has very strong effects on their, proper, working; and, it is not against money, it is about such minds. Money + a cool/cherished mind works *wonders*! Money + frowzy/neglected mind = disaster!) My passions though, I love to direct to other directions. (And please, if you can concentrate somehow on this -- do not quote my address in the body of your replies. I am not angry, but would just love not to see, anyone's, exposed this way. That, in very elementary privacy/security awareness on the end user level. What benefit of a tool if we do not handle it properly?) - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 216 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCUo599q62QPd3XuIRAtL/AKCAgfJJRonuk4vN1Kh3UTDx6WCraQCeIO/Q UMnhfWh+1SE8m0o+uqFRYig= =+JMc -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else, on 05-Apr-2005 at 15:11 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote: In other words, you need just an echo of your attitudes (to feel safe and accepted) You don't know me other than from some characters on your screen that appeared after I tapped a few keys here and there, and chances are very low that you'll ever get to know me. I am self confident enough that I don't need any approval for my attitude and position. Please, stop analyzing me, Mica. This is baring any sense. EOD -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) The man who has never made a mistake will never make anything else. -- George Bernard Shaw Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
On Tuesday, April 5, 2005, 8:16:14 AM, Thomas Fernandez wrote: Should this be moved to TBOT? No. I don't want to read any more of it there either. -- Dwight A. Corrin 928 S Broadway Wichita KS 67211 316.303.1411 fax 316.265.7568 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! 3.0.2.10 on Windows XP version 5,1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
rich gregory writes: There is NO SUCH THING as a trusted source, ever. Yes, there is such a thing, depending on one's security policies. For example, most operating systems consider any user with a valid password for a given identifier to be a trusted user of that identifier. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Tue, 5 Apr 2005, @ @ at 17:36:21 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: I am self confident enough that I don't need any approval for my attitude and position. Please, stop analyzing me, Mica. Alexander, I do am aware, excellently, that you are self confident, and it indeed is not my business or I would find appropriate to deal with it, in any personal way. But I also *have* to say, that what I indeed find very appropriate for analyzing are the attitudes and technics you (and all of us) are presenting here, on a public list, related to usage of software. After all, we are all here exactly for such an activity, to analyze and to think about all presented views, opinions and experiences, in order to apply the results in our practice. If you, or anyone else, for any reason, and in any moment, cannot *distinguish/discriminate* these two elementary things, then of course that communication makes no sense and is fruitless. The outcome of such (temporal or more durable) inability of ours to recognize difference between these two things, leads to the famous (and lately already a pretty boring too) feeling that someone is personally attacked and/or treated in any other or similar *personal* way, just by exposing to an analyze the *technics* s/he utilizes. Please, let's recollect ourselves and bring our activities here to a more effective level, putting aside a bit these so vulnerable personalities whining after us all the time. Is that somehow possible? Self confidence can be (and often is!) built even without any special *content*, or even on a totally *wrong* content. This is *not* my target, I do not point to it, and I am not interested in it, as a member of this, expert, list. And, if some elements of our personalities are not distinguished well enough from elements of our topics here, it's not my business to correct this, and to treat this at all. But, if such lack of enough effective discrimination spoils the purpose and diminishes fruitfulness of the activities of the list itself, then I, as a member of this list, have full and legitimate *rights* to complain and to point this, and to call for corrections. This letter, in reply to Alexander's, is addressed to *whole* list. If I am wrong, in any part, please, you all, *let* me know, and I will correct myself, *immediately*. But, again, seek to use a good, *solid* arguments, based on well read and well considered contents. Arguments of a type the earth is pizza-like, and I have 6 (or even thousands of) friends who will affirm/'witness/attest/certify' that too, will make no difference. Thanks! - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 216 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCUs0V9q62QPd3XuIRAjfTAJ4y2WZhkbh4Kv2OPrk1h7v6H1OBQACeOkY9 teNAdYtwM3cdct12ncnoPM0= =U0s5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Tue, 5 Apr 2005, @ @ at 20:16:14 +0700, when Thomas Fernandez wrote: Hello Mica, My wai. [...] Are we going in circles yet? I don't know. I see the things circling around me but I myself am quite steady, and am parked well. How do *you* feel? Should this be moved to TBOT? I don't know. (-: Decide yourself. - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 216 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCUs1M9q62QPd3XuIRAkGzAJ9Hm7KP3G4Er1GUmiKQotP+bI+2MQCeLei0 R1570Jebjm4UgmyVhyNHh30= =KExQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Mod: Dead horse (was: Re: Anti Virus S/W)
Hallo Thomas, On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 20:16:14 +0700GMT (5-4-2005, 15:16 +0200, where I live), you wrote: TF Should this be moved to TBOT? moderator on Yes. I haven't got an appropriate QT to declare a thread a dead horse, but please take this elsewhere. It's not really TB-related anymore. That counts for all subthreads. moderator off -- Groetjes, Roelof Windows! The magic of turning a 486 into a Gameboy! The Bat! 3.0.9.13 Return Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 1 pop3 account, server on LAN pgpYGqzc4vk1B.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 02:29:15 +0200, Mica Mijatovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, it's about money. I could write some 5-6 KB on this topic, This is not about money, this is about the quality of the software, is that SO hard to understand? -- Gruesse / Greetings, Alexander Kunz Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Monday, April 4, 2005, 2:12:15 PM, Paul wrote: PB Have you asked the List about grouping? The list has helped me over PB the years. Oh, yes! I had a gripe quite recently and many tried to help, but to no avail. -- Cheers, Allister :flag-newzealand: New Zealand / Aotearoa Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Arjan de Groot everyone else, on 04-Apr-2005 at 00:07 you (Arjan de Groot) wrote: You really believe this, do you? I do. I've been using personal computers for almost 20 years now and never needed any protection against virusses, trojans or whatever, whatsoever. There was one incident that change my attitude towards this. I'm normally using Opera, but in order to use some pages, as you surely know, one must use Internet Explorer. One of these sites that require IE *and* ActiveX is ebay when you want to sell something and use their advance picture service. At that time exactly, when I was in the need to use the dreaded IE/ebay combination, IE had a security hole that allowed remote installation of code (whichever way, I can't remember). At the same time, one (or some) of the internet advertising service Falk AG's server(s) was hacked and some malicious code was appended to each ad that was served thru that server. Code that exploited the security hole in IE. You already guess it... I start up IE, go to the ebay page, it loads, and suddenly a window pops up that my Virus Scanner has blocked a trojan from installing. I consider myself an experienced and aware user (even though I am using my machine with an admin account usually, I admit). I am behind a hardware router/firewall and have the WinXP built-in firewall enabled. This was such an everyday situation, I dare say it could've happened to everyone... especially since the standard accounts creating during the Win XP installation are administrative accounts, anyway... Ever heard of the average Joe User? :-) Yes. Poor Average Joe User. Buys Norton Antivirus in a shop and believes he's safe... I see postings here that blame the average user, I don't think that is fair. Melissa Reece mentioned a bit of end user education - well, who's going to do that? -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Tis not too late tomorrow to be brave. -- John Armstrong, in The Art of Preserving Health Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi Alexander, On 4/4/2005 12:54 PM +0200, you wrote: This was such an everyday situation, I dare say it could've happened to everyone... especially since the standard accounts creating during the Win XP installation are administrative accounts, anyway... I got adware/spyware on my machine under similar circumstances. I did nothing active. I had my ad remover switched off since it had caused a problem. That's all ... just allowing ads to show up!!! In a few days of doing that I had popups appearing at system startup etc. I don't visit shady websites either. I do search etc, but I was shocked to say the least. I'd therefore add to my arsenal, ad removal technology. Currently with Opera, I use Kapersky's ad removal functionality. Maxthon has its own built in tool. I see postings here that blame the average user, I don't think that is fair. Melissa Reece mentioned a bit of end user education - well, who's going to do that? True. It's really not a matter of simple education. There's a lot to it. It's ridiculous now and we simply have to run the software rather than sit thinking that we alone can make the difference. I'm sure such user-types exist, but they aren't typical. You gave an example Alex of needing to use IE for a legitimate reason and it compromised your machine without any silly action on your part. -- Allie Martin System specs: http://www.ac-martin.com/sysspecs.htm -=-=- Everyone hates me because I'm paranoid p7sqF4Tx4Tw9X.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony, On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:38:33 +0200 GMT (04/04/2005, 03:38 +0700 GMT), Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: AGA Antivirus products, generally speaking, are inferior substitutes for AGA safe computing practices. They are better than nothing. AGA The only threats that truly justify automated protections are those AGA involving bugs in the software of which you are not aware. This is the AGA principle behind use of a firewall. If your system is properly AGA configured, you theoretically don't need a firewall; but if your OS AGA contains bugs, it's possible that an adversary might compromise your AGA system through legitimate channels by taking advantage of the bug. Firewalls have nothing to do with AV software. AGA If you don't open attachments, and you configure your browser to AGA disallow active content, and you block all incoming ports that are a AGA potential security risk (you can essentially block _all_ ports on a PC AGA that is used only as a client machine), you can be safe, with or without AGA an A/V product. Correct, but impractical. I receive Excel files with executable code in the office. These are legit, and I need to open them. How would I know whether one is infected with a virus? - Only by scanning it. What the situation really demands is a bit of end user education, and there's just no way around it; regardless of how many bits of AV/AT software someone might want to run concurrently (or even having only one running on-access and the other just being available for on-demand scanning). AGA Yes. Conversely, with enough user education, you don't need the A/V AGA software at all. Please educate me how to tell an infected file from a clean one without a virus scanner. -- Cheers, Thomas. Things You Would Never Know Without the Movies: Most laptop computers are powerful enough to override the communication systems of any invading alien civilization. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony, On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 06:02:13 +0200 GMT (04/04/2005, 11:02 +0700 GMT), Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: [...] AGA Then they will get what they deserve. [...] AGA Shared computers are never a good idea. Does this sounds arrogant (or elitaire) or is it just me? -- Cheers, Thomas. Everyone needs belief in something. I believe I'll have another beer. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Alexander, On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 12:54:53 +0200 GMT (04/04/2005, 17:54 +0700 GMT), Alexander S. Kunz wrote: Yes. Poor Average Joe User. Buys Norton Antivirus in a shop and believes he's safe... ASK I see postings here that blame the average user, I don't think that is ASK fair. Melissa Reece mentioned a bit of end user education - well, who's ASK going to do that? I'd say, it's the school system's responsibility. Fact is, poor Joe is still around (and always will), and he might get infected and wouldn't know about it. He might send me an innocent attachment, and I do want to open it. I scan every attachment, regardless of whether there is a confirmation that 100% virus free in the mail. I didn't follow all messages in this thread. Has it been mentioned yet that no AV software detects all malware? -- Cheers, Thomas. Things You Would Never Know Without the Movies: If you decide to start dancing in the street, everyone you bump into will know all the steps. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 04 Apr 2005, @ @ at 08:57:42 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 02:29:15 +0200, Mica Mijatovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, it's about money. I could write some 5-6 KB on this topic, This is not about money, this is about the quality of the software, is that SO hard to understand? I am sorry to see you that upset, but it is not my fault. If you would read collected and really attentively, and not only my message(s), you would be in a much better position to understand both yourself, others, including your customers/clients, and my messages. *Because*, I do not write and spend my time for nothing here, or in any other list, and at all, or for I have no other things to do in my life. I'll not explain now *why* I write, and in the way I do that, but will just say in this moment that these messages have a *sense*, which cannot be beneficial for someone who do not *think* about the content. And such are not only *my* messages. Do *not* be deluded by my jovial style. Simply do *not*. A serious person, in spite of such a style will indeed pay an appropriate attention to the content. If that is omitted, than it is not my fault. I am doing my part of job, and am giving my best in a given moment, so am expecting the other side doing their. We are not here to quarrel, but to help one another. At least, that's how I understand the purpose of this, and similar, expert, lists. /// So, it *is* about money, since the value system used to estimate a software, is directly derived, to a significant extent, from what money means/represents to someone, a particular person, or a group of them. This will be clearly shown in the mentioned message of mine; and for purely practical reasons we deal with here. \\\ Since you stress understanding, seriousness of security/privacy, I have to please you to pay attention not to quote my address in your replies, and please use a proper way of addressing, when you write me privately/off-list (see the bottom lines in my signature). I see today you have sent me a message off-list but it's been deleted from server, due to improper use of my address... 2005-04-04, 12:56:35: FETCH - Message from [EMAIL PROTECTED], Alexander S. Kunz [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject Re: Anti Virus S/W, (ID:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Size:4106 bytes) is marked for DELETION by the filter C5AM-new ...so I would please you to send it again, addressed properly. Also, I would like if you would read again my message mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], about mechanisms of external authorities, and big money environments, their specific value systems and ways of operating -- focused to and applied in domain of software, and especially related to the privacy/security branch. I also would like if we would *always* have in our minds the very reason why we are here: to peruse and investigate things, and to exchange our results and experiences -- in order to help one another, in a more effective usage and orientation. It will indeed, sometimes, shake our own value systems up, since the ways of how some apparently unconnected things show actually very tightly connected, if we a bit closer examine (or even better, *experience*) them. But nevertheless, I very appreciate such sort of quakes since it will show me the weak points, and will force me to take a new, much better and stabler position. If I get even some bruises, and expose myself to other sorts of inconveniences in it, it's not that big deal in comparison to what I get as a final result. That's one of reasons I dare to write about some things, in a way I do; even if it is not very popular. (If I wanted to be popular and/or celebrity I would apply quite different approaches, and/or working environments.) As to nativeness of our languages: English is not my native one too. But our mis|understanding here has very little or nothing with it. Practise! Exercise! This is after all a language you encounter daily dealing with computers. The best practice is -- writing and reading. Especially *attentively* reading! And reading *again*. When *I* do so, often just few words in a new context will give me much wider and richer and more precise ways to convey and receive an information. Here you are in position to have practically an interactive course in English. There are members who use this language in so excellent way that learning/improvement gets acceleration in no time. I would appreciate this fact. At least by reading such messages again and again. And to add just this detail, which would serve to depict the situation even a bit better: the same type of misunderstandings I experience -- and not so seldom -- even using my native language, and in my native environment! Since I know each corner and nook of this language, so nobody could fool me about it, I freely may say that exceptionally rarely the reason
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi On Monday 4 April 2005 at 2:32:44 PM, in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Thomas Fernandez wrote: ... confirmation that 100% virus free in the mail. I once had such certifications turned on for testing purposes and forgot to turn them off before sending an email. The message was bounced back with some comment about anti-virus precautions. I turned off the certifications and resent the same message. It got through and was replied to. -- Best regards, MFPAmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 15:46:50 +0200, Mica Mijatovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: /// So, it *is* about money, since the value system used to estimate a software, is directly derived, to a significant extent, from what money means/represents to someone, a particular person, or a group of them. This will be clearly shown in the mentioned message of mine; and for purely practical reasons we deal with here. Mica, because *you* think it is about money, I still see no need to discuss this any further with you; I tried to mail you off list since this is getting largely OT for quite a while. I am not interested in that kind of conversation, so please stop trying to force me into some higher social details of the story that I see no need to discuss. I've explained my position, please leave me be the way I am. -- Gruesse / Greetings, Alexander Kunz Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 15:34:50 +0200, Thomas Fernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: AGA Then they will get what they deserve. [...] AGA Shared computers are never a good idea. Does this sounds arrogant (or elitaire) or is it just me? Nope, its not only you. -- Gruesse / Greetings, Alexander Kunz Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Alexander S. Kunz writes: There was one incident that change my attitude towards this. I'm normally using Opera, but in order to use some pages, as you surely know, one must use Internet Explorer. One of these sites that require IE *and* ActiveX is ebay when you want to sell something and use their advance picture service. Don't use the advance picture service. In fact, don't use anything that requires ActiveX. I've never come across anything on the Web that required ActiveX that I could not do without. I have all the ActiveX turned off in MSIE, and nowadays I use Firefox, anyway, in which I've also turned off everything I can, including Flash. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Allie Martin writes: It's ridiculous now and we simply have to run the software rather than sit thinking that we alone can make the difference. It only gets dangerous when you stop thinking. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Thomas Fernandez writes: They are better than nothing. Yes, but safe computing practices are better than A/V products, and they are free and do not interfere with the functioning of the OS. Firewalls have nothing to do with AV software. They have a lot to do with safe computing, though. In theory, if you can trust your OS to service open ports properly, you may not need a firewall. In practice, many operating systems can't be trusted that far, especially in the case of general-purpose ports like those used by Windows for remote RPC or NetBIOS. Correct, but impractical. It's very practical. I've been doing it for years. I receive Excel files with executable code in the office. These are legit, and I need to open them. How would I know whether one is infected with a virus? - Only by scanning it. Of course, if it's a virus your scanner doesn't recognize, you'll be infected, anyway. You can open Excel files with Microsoft's free viewer. It won't run macros, but it will let you see the contents. This is sufficient in some cases. Please educate me how to tell an infected file from a clean one without a virus scanner. You don't run files unless they are from a trusted source. Files from a trusted source are clean by definition; files from untrusted sources are never run, so it doesn't matter if they are clean or not. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Thomas Fernandez writes: Does this sounds arrogant (or elitaire) or is it just me? Some people think the mere notion of people having computers at home is arrogant and elitist. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 4 Apr 2005, @ @ at 12:54:53 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: I see postings here that blame the average user, I don't think that is fair. Melissa Reece mentioned a bit of end user education - well, who's going to do that? We. The users. When we, as individuals, ponder, and learn some basic and indispensable things, and when we are applying them in our daily practice, then all the rest will *have* to learn few bits of this and that too, just in order to communicate with us, and to share our common communication environment. If I know that someone is not practising appropriate methods in making his/her machine safe, I will not accept an invitation, for instance, to chat with him/her, will not share files with etc. So, if someone really wants me in this environment s/he will *do* what is needed. Like a safe sex. You have to know/learn some facts about physiology, sociology, psychology, anthropology, cosmogony...even if you are not an expert, that is a physiologist, sociologist etcetera. You surely will not have/invite a third person/part to give you a technical support in the moment you have a wish to spend few minutes, or hours, or days...with your sweetheart. (You is here used in a narrative fashion; it's not a direct addressing to you.) - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 215 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCUVUL9q62QPd3XuIRAkxuAJ9l0ScV43MGg/PVJCuz8bNa66l5OQCfXRn+ PG/pB2mxG8VALrv2jjFIlk8= =enB9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony, On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 16:48:35 +0200 GMT (04/04/2005, 21:48 +0700 GMT), Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: They are better than nothing. AGA Yes, but safe computing practices are better than A/V products, and they AGA are free and do not interfere with the functioning of the OS. You missed the point. Firewalls have nothing to do with AV software. AGA They have a lot to do with safe computing, though. In theory, if you AGA can trust your OS to service open ports properly, you may not need a AGA firewall. In practice, many operating systems can't be trusted that AGA far, especially in the case of general-purpose ports like those used by AGA Windows for remote RPC or NetBIOS. I am not talking about ports. I am talking about attached files that may or may not be infected. Correct, but impractical. AGA It's very practical. I've been doing it for years. You are not in business or academy. In those fields, attached files with macros are common. I receive Excel files with executable code in the office. These are legit, and I need to open them. How would I know whether one is infected with a virus? - Only by scanning it. AGA Of course, if it's a virus your scanner doesn't recognize, you'll be AGA infected, anyway. Right. There is no 100% protection, if you need to open those files. But some protection is better than none. This is where the quality of AV software (freeware or pay-for-ware) comes into the equation. Please educate me how to tell an infected file from a clean one without a virus scanner. AGA You don't run files unless they are from a trusted source. Files from a AGA trusted source are clean by definition; This is utter nonsense. I receive files from people who sent me files before. How do I know they haven't been infected in the meantime? AGA files from untrusted sources are never run, so it doesn't matter AGA if they are clean or not. I see. To the extent that I scan the attachments if I really need to see them. Which does happen. What's a trusted source anyway? I get business proposals from people who attach company profiles. I don't know these people. Should I reject all proposals from people who I don't know yet? Unlikely. Be reasonable. -- Cheers, Thomas. What to not say to the nice policeman: I was trying to keep up with traffic. Yes, I know there is no other car around--that's how far ahead of me they are. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Mica, On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 16:54:04 +0200 GMT (04/04/2005, 21:54 +0700 GMT), Mica Mijatovic wrote: MM If I know that someone is not practising appropriate methods in making MM his/her machine safe, I will not accept an invitation, for instance, MM to chat with him/her, will not share files with etc. So, if someone MM really wants me in this environment s/he will *do* what is needed. The problem is that you usuallly don't know it until being told. In the meantime, you might have shared infected files. -- Cheers, Thomas. 10 Anzeichen, woran Sie bemerken, dass Ihre Lebensmittel nicht mehr geniessbar sind: 7. Der Schnittlauch auf dem Butterbrot blueht. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Alexander, On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 16:17:37 +0200 GMT (04/04/2005, 21:17 +0700 GMT), Alexander S. Kunz wrote: Does this sounds arrogant (or elitaire) or is it just me? ASK Nope, its not only you. OK, thanks for the heads-up. -- Cheers, Thomas. Fettflecken werden wie neu, wenn man sie regelmaessig mit Butter beschmiert. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony G. Atkielski everyone else, on 04-Apr-2005 at 16:48 you (Anthony G. Atkielski) wrote: Files from a trusted source are clean by definition So, every Netsky virus that sends itself around with a fake sender address would come from a trusted source by that definition. Thats secure computing, yep! :-) -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) We are Dyslexia of Borg. Futility is resistant. Your ass will be laminated! Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony G. Atkielski everyone else, on 04-Apr-2005 at 16:43 you (Anthony G. Atkielski) wrote: Don't use the advance picture service Impractical. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one. -- Benjamin Franklin Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi Anthony, On 04/04/2005 04:44 PM +0200, you wrote: It only gets dangerous when you stop thinking. From reading your other messages it would seem that your use of your system and why *you* require or need allows you the luxury of being able to simply avoid risky practices. More power to you that you're able to actually do this. Unfortunately, this isn't practical advice for many, if not most users. I know it's not practical for me. You don't need active X when browsing. Fine. Does this mean others do not? I know I don't stop thinking and I always feel at risk, even though I try to limit my risk profile and do run programs to assist me. I've been hit by a virus *once* and that was in 1998. I was ignorant then and learnt a lesson. I haven't been hit since. It does disturb me that on about 4 occasions I've been sitting in my office and the virus alert appeared. I was doing nothing really. A software firewall is now in place. No one can connect to my system over the network. They don't need to anyway. Same problems happened with browsing. It's just not as simple as you put it anymore. At least not for many, if not most. As I said before, more power to you and your ability to simply avoid. That sort of approach is getting more and more difficult and I'm pretty confident that in the not so different future, you'll be changing your mind. These fellas are getting distressingly good at what they do. -- Allie Martin System specs: http://www.ac-martin.com/sysspecs.htm -=-=- Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Thomas Fernandez writes: You are not in business or academy. In those fields, attached files with macros are common. I'm in both, and macro-laden files comprise only a tiny minority of attached files. Right. There is no 100% protection, if you need to open those files. Often, you don't need to open those files. This is utter nonsense. I receive files from people who sent me files before. How do I know they haven't been infected in the meantime? By whether or not you consider them trusted sources. What's a trusted source anyway? One that you know will not provide infected files. I get business proposals from people who attach company profiles. I don't know these people. Should I reject all proposals from people who I don't know yet? If they contain executable code, yes. It works for me. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Alexander S. Kunz writes: So, every Netsky virus that sends itself around with a fake sender address would come from a trusted source by that definition. Trusted sources are verifiable sources. Digital signatures come in handy here. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Alexander S. Kunz writes: Impractical. Not for me. I've used eBay without the need for ActiveX. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony G. Atkielski everyone else, on 04-Apr-2005 at 17:40 you (Anthony G. Atkielski) wrote: Impractical. Not for me. I've used eBay without the need for ActiveX. That conversation ends here, because it start to get redundant. See mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Everything science has taught me, and continues to teach me, strengthens my belief in the continuity of our spiritual existence after death. -- Wernher von Braun Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony, On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 17:39:51 +0200 GMT (04/04/2005, 22:39 +0700 GMT), Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: You are not in business or academy. In those fields, attached files with macros are common. AGA I'm in both, and macro-laden files comprise only a tiny minority of AGA attached files. Different sitautions between you and me. Right. There is no 100% protection, if you need to open those files. AGA Often, you don't need to open those files. Yet often enough, I do. This is utter nonsense. I receive files from people who sent me files before. How do I know they haven't been infected in the meantime? AGA By whether or not you consider them trusted sources. What's a trusted source anyway? AGA One that you know will not provide infected files. My point is that some oneone who sent me uninfected files one day, may send me an infected file the next. I have no control over what they do with their computer. I get business proposals from people who attach company profiles. I don't know these people. Should I reject all proposals from people who I don't know yet? AGA If they contain executable code, yes. It works for me. Not for me. Well, if they send me .exe files, I do ask them to send me sensible files. But an Excel atttachment is quite common. -- Cheers, Thomas. A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS But it uses up a thousand times the memory. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Allie Martin writes: From reading your other messages it would seem that your use of your system and why *you* require or need allows you the luxury of being able to simply avoid risky practices. More power to you that you're able to actually do this. Unfortunately, this isn't practical advice for many, if not most users. I know it's not practical for me. You don't need active X when browsing. Fine. Does this mean others do not? It's important to distinguish between what is necessary and what is desirable. I've never found anything using ActiveX that was _necessary_ for me. So I turned it off. Instant Messaging is not necessary for me, so I don't use it, and the ports it uses are blocked. The only file attachments I've ever needed to see were text files and a very occasional image file. I have ways of opening both that eliminate any executable code. Everything else goes into the bit bucket. I switched to TB from Outlook Express because OE wouldn't let me turn off display of HTML mail, and it insisted on opening some attachments automatically, which I didn't want. Even so, my configuration of OE was very secure, and I was never infected with anything via it. And so on. These fellas are getting distressingly good at what they do. I've been good at what I do for a very long time. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Thomas Fernandez writes: My point is that some oneone who sent me uninfected files one day, may send me an infected file the next. Then that person is not a trusted source. Not for me. Well, if they send me .exe files, I do ask them to send me sensible files. But an Excel atttachment is quite common. You can open Excel attachments with the free MS viewer; it does not execute macros. Macro viruses are very rare these days, anyway. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi Anthony, On 04/04/2005 05:40 PM +0200, you wrote: Not for me. If this is only about you, then there's nothing to discuss. General advice on security can never be based on individual needs or specialized measures. The best security measures are never generic. They're based on the profile of the user and what threats/risks they encounter. Yes... tailoring approach is a major factor. However, it's all too often inadequate, though there are notable exceptions, yourself included. I just got a message with an attachment. It's not digitally signed as most of my messages containing legitimate attachments aren't. I guess I can't use that as a measure of what can be trusted from what can't be. Just not practical. All your arguments have glaring loopholes in real world environments other than yours. Your security model just isn't practical for many if not most users. I'm being repetitive here so I'm finished here. -- Allie Martin System specs: http://www.ac-martin.com/sysspecs.htm -=-=- Courage atrophies from lack of use. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
***^\ ._)~~
~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 4 Apr 2005,
@ @ at 16:44:00 +0200, when Anthony G. Atkielski wrote:
Allie Martin writes:
It's ridiculous now and we simply have to run the software rather
than sit thinking that we alone can make the difference.
It only gets dangerous when you stop thinking.
It might get dangerous even if you are thinking. (-: Even more. LOL
So, the most kinky, I mean unconv{entional|ient}, part for some of us is
seemingly that we have to learn, to get a bit of education, even on how
to *think* properly.
And that's what is pinching...
- --
Mica
PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/
[Earth LOG: 215 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing]
OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium
with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo
and Vector via Wine...
~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my
From|Reply To field(s). ~~~
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
iD8DBQFCUVxo9q62QPd3XuIRAhMnAJ9fAsbtMWi6jJe9GWedFH13+v7YiACghoOu
YZY7RdLwmbC1ODyt9hpD6XY=
=0amC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi Anthony, On 04/04/2005 05:56 PM +0200, you wrote: I've been good at what I do for a very long time. Nah. You're just able to avoid doing a lot of things others can't. I find it disturbing that you imply that your method will work for others. This implies that what you merely desire and can therefore avoid, can never be a need for another. This is a highly unreasonable position to take. Of course, if you're simply sharing a method that just may work for a chosen few, then please clarify so that I can leave let alone. -- Allie Martin System specs: http://www.ac-martin.com/sysspecs.htm -=-=- Four minus two is one and the same. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony, On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 17:58:56 +0200 GMT (04/04/2005, 22:58 +0700 GMT), Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: My point is that some oneone who sent me uninfected files one day, may send me an infected file the next. AGA Then that person is not a trusted source. Not, they aren't. Yet, I have to open the attachment. This is business. AGA You can open Excel attachments with the free MS viewer; it does not AGA execute macros. So it's useless. I don't think you get the point at all. AGA Macro viruses are very rare these days, anyway. So? Thank you, but I'll scan those files anyway. -- Cheers, Thomas. Ein Computerfreak wird die Zeit, die der Computer automatisch arbeitet, dazu benutzen, ihm dabei unbewegt zuzusehen, um zu beobachten, ob er richtig laeuft. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Allie Martin writes: Nah. You're just able to avoid doing a lot of things others can't. Most can avoid them; they just don't want to. The urge to see a video of Paris Hilton is just too strong. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi Anthony, On 04/04/2005 06:14 PM +0200, you wrote: Most can avoid them; they just don't want to. The urge to see a video of Paris Hilton is just too strong. Your funny. :) -- Allie Martin System specs: http://www.ac-martin.com/sysspecs.htm -=-=- Nothing is impossible for anyone impervious to reason Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 4 Apr 2005, @ @ at 22:17:47 +0700, when Thomas Fernandez wrote: On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 16:54:04 +0200 GMT (04/04/2005, 21:54 +0700 GMT), Mica Mijatovic wrote: MM If I know that someone is not practising appropriate methods in MM making his/her machine safe, I will not accept an invitation, for MM instance, to chat with him/her, will not share files with etc. MM So, if someone really wants me in this environment s/he will *do* MM what is needed. The problem is that you usuallly don't know it until being told. In the meantime, you might have shared infected files. In the meantime you could learn too. There are many ways. Once scorched you'll probably be more careful next time(s), with this source/person. - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 215 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCUXU19q62QPd3XuIRAnrOAKCZD26+bOWN2psgZ3AEdYYKD2AB9gCdHmoc UeIdtWQARZf18JKxomK6lkA= =EDjk -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 04 Apr 2005, @ @ at 11:01:00 -0500, when Allie Martin wrote to Anthony: Your security model just isn't practical for many if not most users. Security model is only one, and is same for all. If you're swimming upstream, you will find its source. Drinking from the well, the model's getting clear. Confusion disappears, ducklings plash in mirth, practical for All. (Not even for the many.) - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 215 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCUXu09q62QPd3XuIRAvWBAJwLP4vEPP8s64mdC4VHHlYUuF+xRgCfQtLc wsZNOHMkjvLFBYg7CIakNGA= =gctJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi On Monday 4 April 2005 at 4:56:12 PM, in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: I switched to TB from Outlook Express because OE wouldn't let me turn off display of HTML mail, Tools | Options | Read tab | Read all messages in plain text in OE 6; dunno about other versions. and it insisted on opening some attachments automatically, I couldn't get around that one either. -- Best regards, MFPAmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi On Monday 4 April 2005 at 3:43:09 PM, in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: I have all the ActiveX turned off in MSIE, and nowadays I use Firefox, anyway, in which I've also turned off everything I can, including Flash. Is there a risk to Flash? -- Best regards, MFPAmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello MFPA everyone else, on 04-Apr-2005 at 20:26 you (MFPA) wrote: Is there a risk to Flash? ...you're male, so... probably not. SCNR! -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Our dreams dream us. -- Anonymous Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
MFPA writes: Tools | Options | Read tab | Read all messages in plain text in OE 6; dunno about other versions. I have OE 6, and I don't see any such option. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
MFPA writes: Is there a risk to Flash? Flash contains instructions that are executable on the local machine; therefore there's always a risk. There have been some reported virus infections of Flash content. I don't have any legitimate use for Flash so I have no Flash software installed. I worry about PDF as well, which is one reason why I'm still using an old version (version 4.05) of Acrobat. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Tim Casten writes: it a feature in the sp2 version Oh. Well, it was too little, too late, as I now use TB for my e-mail (despite several annoying bugs). I haven't even installed SP2, since I'm sure it will break applications, and I can't afford to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars upgrading applications to make them work with a service pack that has broken them (assuming they can even be fixed, which isn't always the case). -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Kevin Coates writes: Most of us spend a fair amount of money on our hardware and Internet access. Buying a decent AV package should be part of the process. Yes, you can do it for free, but is it worth the risk? If you don't open attachments, have a firewall, and don't run active content on your browser, you won't be infected by viruses and the like, with or without antivirus software. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony G. Atkielski everyone else, on 03-Apr-2005 at 10:13 you (Anthony G. Atkielski) wrote: If you don't open attachments, have a firewall, and don't run active content on your browser, you won't be infected by viruses and the like, with or without antivirus software. Nonsense. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Time is Nature's way of making sure that everything doesn't go wrong at once. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Allister Jenks everyone else, on 03-Apr-2005 at 03:29 you (Allister Jenks) wrote: I think there is also considerable risk in placing any weight behind payware being of better quality because you have to pay for it. I never meant to say that. I realise you said the first two factors do not include cost, but subsequent statements have been negatory on the free bit. I am using a lot of free software. I just don't divide them into categories (like, whether its free because the vendor wants to advertise a full version this way, or if its done out of enthusiasm by individuals to serve the purpose that a free software that does this and that should exist). If a software does its job good for me, I use it (and pay for it), its that simple. :-) -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) In the society of men the truth resides now less in what things are than in what they are not. -- R. D. Laing Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
On Sunday, April 3, 2005, 0:57:11, Alexander S. Kunz wrote: My intention was only to state a bold be aware when talking about free-of-cost antivirus programs. since in that context, I found no free software that serves the purpose well enough; and another be aware seeing how easily people recommend this or that program, just because they like it - and this personal liking often goes beyond functionality and/or reason. My experience: during the two latest worm outbreaks (Bagle.AZ and something else), AVG Free detected the virus several hours before Trend Micro, NAV and Panda have. -- Jernej Simoncic http://deepthought.ena.si/ Nothing matters very much, and few things matter at all. -- Erhard's Contention Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Alexander S. Kunz writes: Nonsense. It has worked flawlessly for me for many years. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony G. Atkielski everyone else, on 03-Apr-2005 at 11:16 you (Anthony G. Atkielski) wrote: Nonsense. It has worked flawlessly for me for many years. That doesn't mean it will work for everyone else. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Until the day of his death, no man can be sure of his courage. -- Jean Anouilh Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Jeff Gaines everyone else, on 01-Apr-2005 at 12:05 you (Jeff Gaines) wrote: Has anybody any recommendations for an effective A/V product that will work unobtrusively in the background and check my incoming email? Very interesting comparisons can be found on the comparative section of http://www.av-comparatives.org The November 2004 retrospective scanning is very interesting, they tested various scanners with completely outdated virus signature files (from August 2004) against 8 new in-the-wild viruses|virii|virae (sp?), NOD32 is the only one with 100% detection rate - they have a very good heuristic/generic scan engine. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) The real art of conversation is not only to say the right thing at the right time, but also to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony G. Atkielski everyone else, on 03-Apr-2005 at 10:13 you (Anthony G. Atkielski) wrote: If you don't open attachments, have a firewall, and don't run active content on your browser, you won't be infected by viruses and the like, with or without antivirus software. Sidenote, about that active content thing... Browsing the Web and Reading E-mail Safely as an Administrator http://msdn.microsoft.com/security/securecode/columns/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dncode/html/secure11152004.asp -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Professor Goddard does not know the relation between action and reaction and the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react. He seems to lack the basic knowledge ladled out daily in high schools. -- 1921 New York Times editorial about Robert Goddard's revolutionary rocket work. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Alexander S. Kunz writes: That doesn't mean it will work for everyone else. They do have to be diligent, yes. But antivirus software doesn't work for everyone, either, and it can cause lots of problems, as well as inducing a false sense of security. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sun, 3 Apr 2005, @ @ at 12:28:06 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: Hello Jeff Gaines everyone else, on 01-Apr-2005 at 12:05 you (Jeff Gaines) wrote: Has anybody any recommendations for an effective A/V product that will work unobtrusively in the background and check my incoming email? Very interesting comparisons can be found on the comparative section of http://www.av-comparatives.org The November 2004 retrospective scanning is very interesting, they tested various scanners with completely outdated virus signature files (from August 2004) against 8 new in-the-wild viruses|virii|virae (sp?), NOD32 is the only one with 100% detection rate - they have a very good heuristic/generic scan engine. If you need some *external* authority to affirm your very personal face-to-fact experience (or even your *existence* itself! (-: ), then wouldn't be bad to check out for instance who was nominated, by an Authority of Nobel's prize(s) in last 10, 20, or even 30 years (especially for peace), when the global system of values has began its severe decomposition. (-: If *that* is so reliable, what to say about authorities in the sphere of software. g And especially regarding security and privacy. No, and *no*, I do not say that here mentioned NOD32 is a bad or not so good! (My personal experiences with it are excellent.) I just say that an external authority is *not* enough, especially in the areas where a big money is flowing around. Let's be a bit more...reasonable. There is no guarantees that even a very good software, becoming popular, and enough renowned, will not become something else pretty soon, if there are enough reasons for this. Influence of money and external (especially corporate) authority to human mind, shouldn't be underestimated. My intention is here to say: let's try to be our own navigators, our own light, in situations when so many false ones are present. Because, we *are* capable for this! (-: And, in some way, we are even *obliged* to do so... - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 214 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCT+UH9q62QPd3XuIRAglTAJ9bHVmQOj6oKj5rEbfqiVb7DwQE4wCgis3Z ddti6s/ivDyD4XwbhE3RWe0= =23WV -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sun, 3 Apr 2005, @ @ at 11:39:02 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: Hello Anthony G. Atkielski everyone else, on 03-Apr-2005 at 11:16 you (Anthony G. Atkielski) wrote: Nonsense. It has worked flawlessly for me for many years. That doesn't mean it will work for everyone else. |~~| | *Nothing* works in same way for everyone else. (-: | |~~| That's the point of all this recent segment of the thread. There is a certain chemistry between a software and a human being, as there is a chemistry between two humans. One might have a *jewel* in his/her hands, but if s/he is taking some *external* authority to verify her/his *own personal* experience, then s/he is simply lost, since is not using own personal capabilities to estimate the value of it, the jewel, when it is -- in her/his *own* hands! (-: The jewel will *not* ray the same values in different hands. That's the reason why is good to just introduce some pair, *if* we think/feel, they will go well together. That is, to say some *elementary* words about some software, and not indulge in a fantasy what *you* would do, or feel, if you would possess it/him/her. (-; You know, it is a bit...perverse, in the other, not very pleasant, sense of this word; a bit...inappropriately obtrusive. (-; DISCLAIMER: And...if someone even *try* to see even a *shadow* of the thought, of how is that above a nonsense, or a ridiculous rat -- think again, and at least 36 times, before you expose in a most vulnerable way to my tiny cannon overfull by silvery. (-: *This* missive, connected with my initial one mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], especially with its part talking about objective testing in a compulsive business (buy-sell) environment, will give the basic elements of a perfect navigation in the world of software, but wider too, since it relates to our tendencies to redirect our emotions to software, and other *things*, instead to allow them to flow naturally; which is the reason why a man would love his car much more than his wife, (-; and why a woman would be in love with the money much rather than with her hubby. (-; *There*, why emotions erupt when a talk about software escalates, and why these estimations are then so fallible. - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 214 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCT+jv9q62QPd3XuIRAhRUAJ9FlLAN/03ZFc9XY6yMYn9BmSBnmQCfX4bH jDSrcZXsodtDUp5MDIpyvGM= =94JV -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else, on 03-Apr-2005 at 14:43 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote: Let's be a bit more...reasonable Whatever you say Mica, it will be right for sure. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Violence breeds more violence, and it is predicted that by 1990 kidnapping will be the dominant mode of social interaction. -- Woody Allen Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Alexander, On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 20:25:53 +0200 (2:25 PM here), Alexander S. Kunz [ASK] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ASK A good virus scanner is only one part of a complete security ASK strategy, and you named a couple of very good additional programs ASK (and conception) that I use myself, too. :-) I'm sure there are some other useful security related program that I haven't heard of. I'm always interested in that type of thing. I suppose we should move this to TBOT. To keep on topic, I consider The Bat! another important part of the overall security scheme. While its true you often get what you pay for, I think a reasonable defence can be built for free. Not all AV programs are effective for intercepting spyware. ASK You are of course right. Currently, dealing with ad- and spyware ASK requires separate programs (Mica: free programs, oh yes ;-). I can appreciate those living on a fixed income and I'm thankful that there are free programs that can be utilized. ASK I can imagine that more and more AV program vendors will include ASK complete spyware removal into their products in the future, ASK because ad- and spyware becomes more and more virus (or trojan) ASK like. This seems to be the trend. The various threats are beginning to blend together. Already some of the Suites are already attempting to do this. Their cost is fairly significant and then there's the annual renewal fees. ASK For anyone who's interested, there's a nice set of articles by ASK Tom Liston of ISC that describes the problem: Thanks ... I visited the links and tried the bad boy link. No spyware was installed, so what I have must be working. Most of us spend a fair amount of money on our hardware and Internet access. Buying a decent AV package should be part of the process. Yes, you can do it for free, but is it worth the risk? ASK I rest my case. :-) I think these types of discussions help elevate awareness of both the problems and the solutions. - -- Kevin Coates Dewitt, NY USA Using TB! v3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1.2600 SP2 (see kludges for my pgp key) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCUBeBvZSrVDqOXK0RAqFeAKDMULk84DbH+vZaD2tmITuRWfznoQCglbeX 3TpYIENY97iFmCbctFLuuNI= =HATK -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Jernej Simoncic everyone else, on 03-Apr-2005 at 11:05 you (Jernej Simoncic) wrote: My experience: during the two latest worm outbreaks (Bagle.AZ and something else), AVG Free detected the virus several hours before Trend Micro, NAV and Panda have. Here's a chart of reaction times for the outbreaks of Bagle.BB thru .BD: http://www.pcwelt.de/news/sicherheit/104653/ (german only, but thats not important for the time charts) on the pages 2,3,4. The interesting part, at least for me, is that some scanners (BitDefender, Sophos and partly F-Prot) recognized the virus without updates. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Deliplayer2 is playing: Holy Dance by Tetsu Inoue from the album 'Ambiant Otaku' Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi Rich, On Sunday, April 03, 2005, at 9:25:09 AM PST, you wrote: NOW, A QUESTION: Is anyone here running more than one A/V product on their PCs? It has always been a no-no to do this but the threats out there and the coverage any one product may be able to protect against almost seem to demand it! The one thing that's getting very little mention here is the concept of careful practices above and beyond any particular choice of AV/AT and other types of protective software. This involves a multi-layered approach involving the careful selection of software (email/news clients, browsers, etc.), safe configurations of said software, and enough sense to know what not to click on, download, etc. regardless of what any AV/AT software might or might not have to say about it. What the situation really demands is a bit of end user education, and there's just no way around it; regardless of how many bits of AV/AT software someone might want to run concurrently (or even having only one running on-access and the other just being available for on-demand scanning). If someone is either very determined to infect their machine, or simply clueless in the realm of prevention, even the best AV/AT software can eventually let something slip by. I am considering running side by side nod32 AVG... At best, that's useless overkill in my view (I also still have questions as to AVG's overall quality). As far as *anti-virus* goes, NOD32 alone should be enough (see again my comments above concerning careful practices). Trojans are another issue, and even with a great AV like NOD32, I still feel a little better running BOClean alongside (these two do not conflict, as they work on different levels, and in different ways). -- Melissa PGP public keys: http://www.kuviahunnihautik.tk/ TB! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2 pgpp1Bo3O2Alo.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Melissa Reese writes: The one thing that's getting very little mention here is the concept of careful practices above and beyond any particular choice of AV/AT and other types of protective software. I've mentioned it. Antivirus products, generally speaking, are inferior substitutes for safe computing practices. You can avoid virus infections without antivirus products through careful computing practices, but you cannot completely avoid virus infections through the use of A/V products if you don't practice safe computing as well. A/V products can give a false sense of security, and they can mess up your system as well. The only threats that truly justify automated protections are those involving bugs in the software of which you are not aware. This is the principle behind use of a firewall. If your system is properly configured, you theoretically don't need a firewall; but if your OS contains bugs, it's possible that an adversary might compromise your system through legitimate channels by taking advantage of the bug. Ideally, you can just shut all ports on your PC that are open to the world, and prevent this. But some operating systems leave certain ports open, and you have no choice in the matter (Windows does this for a handful of ports). Then you need a firewall. The firewall should preferably be separate hardware, since a firewall in your PC may be no more reliable than the OS on which it is running. This involves a multi-layered approach involving the careful selection of software (email/news clients, browsers, etc.), safe configurations of said software, and enough sense to know what not to click on, download, etc. regardless of what any AV/AT software might or might not have to say about it. If you don't open attachments, and you configure your browser to disallow active content, and you block all incoming ports that are a potential security risk (you can essentially block _all_ ports on a PC that is used only as a client machine), you can be safe, with or without an A/V product. What the situation really demands is a bit of end user education, and there's just no way around it; regardless of how many bits of AV/AT software someone might want to run concurrently (or even having only one running on-access and the other just being available for on-demand scanning). Yes. Conversely, with enough user education, you don't need the A/V software at all. If someone is either very determined to infect their machine, or simply clueless in the realm of prevention, even the best AV/AT software can eventually let something slip by. Yes. And in the absence of OS bugs, and in the face of a prudent user, even the most determined virus cannot enter a system. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Anthony G. Atkielski everyone else, on 03-Apr-2005 at 22:38 you (Anthony G. Atkielski) wrote: If you don't open attachments, and you configure your browser to disallow active content, and you block all incoming ports that are a potential security risk (you can essentially block _all_ ports on a PC that is used only as a client machine), you can be safe, with or without an A/V product You really believe this, do you? Ever heard of the average Joe User? :-) -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) What is now proved was once only imagined. -- William Blake Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Alexander S. Kunz writes: You really believe this, do you? Yes. As I've said, it has worked for me for many years. Ever heard of the average Joe User? Yes. So? -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi Alexander, On Sunday, April 03, 2005, at 1:47:23 PM PST, you wrote: If you don't open attachments, and you configure your browser to disallow active content, and you block all incoming ports that are a potential security risk (you can essentially block _all_ ports on a PC that is used only as a client machine), you can be safe, with or without an A/V product You really believe this, do you? Ever heard of the average Joe User? :-) Do you excuse a bad driver just because they might not know what a red light means? Or do you feel it's the driver's responsibility to keep themselves informed of such potentially useful (indeed, essential) bits of knowledge? In the greater scheme of things, it really doesn't matter what one chooses to believe. What matters is learning how to use the tools we choose to use. It is unfortunate that we have to be so concerned with various security and privacy issues, but since these tools (PCs with their OSs and other software) are not entirely safe and/or secure *out of the box* with regards to what might come in to them, invited or not, from the Internet, I still *believe* that there's no real substitute for a bit of end user education. No amount of protective software will eliminate the necessity to learn something that is necessary to learn. Since our lack of knowledge and vigilance *can*, and obviously *does* affect others in negative ways, being willing to learn a thing or two is not just for your own benefit, but for the benefit of others as well. In that sense, it is our *responsibility* to learn how to most effectively and safely use these tools we insist upon using. As far as Anthony's one particular comment above goes... If you don't open attachments, ...I have mixed feelings if a small caveat is not appended. While *never opening any attachments* will indeed keep one relatively safer than if one were to *never* open any attachment, if the admonition to not open *any* attachment is taken too literally, the usefulness of the Internet in this respect can be somewhat diminished for the end user. I send and receive attachments all the time, and it *can* be a very convenient *and safe* way to obtain and share various types of files. Again, the safe exchange of attached files of any sort depends upon how much a person is willing to learn about the potential dangers of opening certain types of files; whether they be attached to an email or downloaded in some other way. -- Melissa PGP public keys: http://www.kuviahunnihautik.tk/ TB! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2 pgpVf4C5QXu8W.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hi, On Sunday, April 03, 2005, at 2:16:42 PM PST, I wrote: While *never opening any attachments* will indeed keep one relatively safer than if one were to *never* open any attachment, Oops! That didn't turn out as intended. I should have written something like... While *never opening any attachments* will indeed keep one relatively safer than if one were to open any attachments, Sorry about that! :-) -- Melissa PGP public keys: http://www.kuviahunnihautik.tk/ TB! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2 pgpEpBe1P06QD.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:47:23 +0200, Alexander S. Kunz wrote: If you don't open attachments, and you configure your browser to disallow active content, and you block all incoming ports that are a potential security risk (you can essentially block _all_ ports on a PC that is used only as a client machine), you can be safe, with or without an A/V product You really believe this, do you? I do. I've been using personal computers for almost 20 years now and never needed any protection against virusses, trojans or whatever, whatsoever. When TB! got plug-in support I installed AVG though. That was funny and more or less informative while it lasted. But in the end I got fed up with the incessant Swen.A and Netsky.Q notifications and uninstalled AVG. Ever heard of the average Joe User? :-) Yes. Poor Average Joe User. Buys Norton Antivirus in a shop and believes he's safe... Arjan -- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'll chop just tiny bit of this message in this moment, since I am pretty asleep, will have to plunge into my bed, and to dream something nice, by chance, if it turned to be a dreaming night, which sometimes happens, and sometimes not, almost. ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sun, 3 Apr 2005, @ @ at 00:57:11 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: 1) This perhaps leads to a meta discussion about the different types and motivations of free software, and it was not my intention to lead the discussion into that direction. My intention was only to state a bold be aware when talking about free-of-cost antivirus programs. since in that context, I found no free software that serves the purpose well enough; and another be aware seeing how easily people recommend this or that program, just because they like it - and this personal liking often goes beyond functionality and/or reason. Okay, it's about money. I could write some 5-6 KB on this topic, probably on TBOT, these days, but be warned -- this theme is even much more taboo than a *hot*, hot sex(uality)! It might hurt someone's feelings, since it's about a false sense of personal security some people derive from having/spending money. 2) Hope you had a nice ride. :-) Oh, I had! (-: It was a wet, a bit foggy night, with tiny tiny rain, almost as a water dust, so fresh and sappy air, and enough dark along the rivers. (Which smelt so good! Danube is pretty high here so the first level of quay is under water completely, with lots of trees and fern.) Chilly frosty and sharp night, just as I needed then. But had to go back somewhat prematurely since I got hungry suddenly and had spent my olives too fast. - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 215 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCUIpa9q62QPd3XuIRAv/jAJ0QWz7nWqc6ka68nFIIX9AYVz6z2gCgjflJ hxKBNLyFOzjugQu4bZvj0IU= =IOou -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Melissa Reese writes: ...I have mixed feelings if a small caveat is not appended. While *never opening any attachments* will indeed keep one relatively safer than if one were to *never* open any attachment, if the admonition to not open *any* attachment is taken too literally, the usefulness of the Internet in this respect can be somewhat diminished for the end user. In practice, I open messages with F10 in TB in order to examine the original text of the message if they are marked as containing attachments. If it is clear that none of the attachments contain executable code, then I'll open the message normally. I won't open anything that can contain executable code. That includes Flash animations. I'll open still photos, plain text files, and a few others that I know to be safe, and nothing else; everything else I delete from the message in order to recover the space. I'm sure I've missed many cute animations of dancing babies and dogs and self-transforming Volkswagens and so on. I have only Microsoft viewers installed on my machine, so I can open Word documents and the like, because the viewers can't run macros. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
rich gregory writes: Some of the users I support tend to not want, care or be able to understand anything remotely like best practices. They include several stages of youth and the elderly. Some are quite arrogant and purposefully flaunt bad habits without regard to the dangers. Then they will get what they deserve. Some of these people, who will of course get infected just to see what happens, share with mom the only computer in the house. Shared computers are never a good idea. -- Anthony __ Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sat, 2 Apr 2005, @ @ at 14:16:43 +1200, when Allister Jenks wrote: Friday, April 1, 2005, 10:05:22 PM, Jeff wrote: JG Has anybody any recommendations for an effective A/V product that will JG work unobtrusively in the background and check my incoming email? I recommend AVG. The best part is it is free! I've used it for years now with zero issues and it integrates nicely with TB! I know that I pretty often use some weird, not main stream, applications, (-; but you would like perhaps to try AntiVir. No integration with anything needed, it will check for any IN/OUT traffic anyway, including POP3, and web pages, and will not slow down/interfere with any other application. There are free (for personal use) and paid (for corporate use) editions, direct Internet update, although is possible to update it via a download manager, if you find it so more convenient. www.free-av.de - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 213 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCTlO/9q62QPd3XuIRAp2NAJ9+Ytbmi3SV8WjJaNThNCZvBbUs1gCgg/As guzfQBLzIMtCYKPwwO7DDgI= =sRIQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else, on 02-Apr-2005 at 10:11 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote: AntiVir Every time someone asks for an AV program recommendation, the answers contain things like it always worked for me or I had zero issues or its fast and resource friendly or even the best thing: its free! (if thats the best thing for you about a virus scanner, you have to seriously think about what your intentions are when using the program!) In other words: answers that IMHO have *nothing* to do with the choice of an AV program. Please, stop it. This is about security, privacy, preventing damage to yourself and others, and not some personal preference. The FIRST question for a virus scanner IS and must always be: how good is the scanner? (there are dozens of tests out there to find out, and I'd advise anyone looking for a virus scanner to read at least three different tests, and not ask in a newsgroup or mailing list). Second question is: how often do I get updates, and along with that, how easily can I get the updates, do I get small update files automagically in the background every time I connect to the internet, or do I have to manually download and install a big file? Only *after* these two things like resources and cost for the program can further add to the consideration which program to choose. A piece of (worthwile?) information maybe. Just for your consideration. The following is plain simple FACTS. Last wednesday, one of our customers brought his laptop computer, he said that whenever he connected to the internet, the machine would almost stall and be totally unusable (typical sign for heavy virus or adware infection when you're using a small band internet connection). Looking at it, I found a *totally* outdated Norton AV on it, so I removed NAV and installed AntiVir free edition (downloaded the *most* recent version). I intentionally did not fix things manually (like HKLM/run entries removal, checking the BHO plugins, etc.) but let only the scanner work. First scan with AntiVir - it found 87 malware files (worms and adware droppers) removed them successfully. Sounds good, does it? After that, I removed AntiVir and installed GData AVK (which uses the Kasperky + Bitdefender engines). I scanned the machine again. AVK found another *NINE* malware files of different types - amongst them one Internet Explorer BHO adware dropper, that would install itself again every time you start IE. To make it clear: AntiVir removed 87 malware files, but it did not clean the machine. I want to add my very personal opinion here: the program may be free, but it is useless. 'Nuff said. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) I have kleptomania, but when it gets bad, I take something for it. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sat, 2 Apr 2005, @ @ at 13:21:26 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else, G'day to All. on 02-Apr-2005 at 10:11 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote: AntiVir Every time someone asks for an AV program recommendation, the answers contain things like it always worked for me or I had zero issues or its fast and resource friendly or even the best thing: its free! (if thats the best thing for you about a virus scanner, you have to seriously think about what your intentions are when using the program!) In other words: answers that IMHO have *nothing* to do with the choice of an AV program. Please, stop it. This is about security, privacy, preventing damage to yourself and others, and not some personal preference. It's pretty good said I admit, but am confused over your addressing to me, that is to my message, you para-reply to, to say so, since plainly *no* comment you exposed here is relating to what *I* wrote. But I am accustomed to the chaos and confusion these days occupying global communications and will exert my famous patience, once more time. (-: In a measure. We all have rights to leave our beds using wrong leg(s)/hand(s), depending on the number of our extremities and their shapes, as well as on our personal style of communicating with our environment in such sensitive moments, then barking on the wrong tree(s), benches and wheels, and feeling sick and tired for nothing then, if we indeed yearn to make our day, instead to...simply make our day. (-: Because all of them are anyway...beautiful. Let's attune with/to. I just said to Allister, that he would like perhaps to try AntiVir, listing some main features of it, and that was all. I said *nothing* about anything else, since it has to be done -- on the *user* level. I can't judge about other's routines and strategies, and of means and ways he uses to apply them. This is why I used the term try. [...] A piece of (worthwile?) information maybe. Just for your consideration. The following is plain simple FACTS. Ah, my favorite f word! (-: But you don't have to yell to me, I am not your wife. (-: Now, well, testings are not that bad, but they will vary a *lot* depending on environment, and even *much* more depending on the given particular user. In other words and very shortly: all this AV work depends exclusively on User as the crucial point in the entire AV system since it is governed -- by the User. No higher intelligence is present in there, and hence no a best software. Someone might screw entire system up, using the best and most expensive software around (sounds familiar, you work in a service, no?), while someone else might make quite solidly protected system using almost -- anything! I personally have just a cute arsenal of this and that, and am using it in many various ways and amounts (AntiVir is just one of them), as particular situation requires, sticking with no particular software as with my favorite one, since it changes all the time, in all ways and directions, because they *sell* these things and *this* is the main value in a such value system, *not* effectiveness/reasonability. (That's also a reason I like to have some previous and outdated software as well.) So let's not be deluded much about perfection and the best whatever in the realm of software, and especially of the sensitive one, as AV an similar ones are. (-; Testings also serve, in a fine amount, to *sell* the product, as the main goal, and are *not* objective all the way. In other words, they like to lie, and they do that. Like any hyperactive addicted seller. (-: And just a short retrospection, as to free software topic, but in a very selective way... Some people sometimes make software for their personal use only, and sometimes they also make it publicly accessible. Such software, being beyond disordered value systems found in the compulsive, obsessive and hyperactive selling (and buying?) environments, distinguish by the specific properties of *purposefulness*, effectiveness, reliability and reasonability. *This* is the free software I recommend, sometimes -- *when* I do that, *and* in a given time -- which wasn't the case *this* time; and these are the reasons I do that. [...] 'Nuff said. There are few letters of Melissa Reese, related to anti thingies, both on this and TBOT list, and they (for instance) really are enough to cover just finely entire this issue, but...it seems they are not a lot read around. (-, There is no a special avail in writing if it is not read, or is not done attentively. For instance, how do you succeed to see things I didn't write in my message you are meta-para-replying to? (-: I know, I know...it's not a big problem, you just mixed your legs, and it happens (to beings of many legs). Just remix them and try this again. (-: Let's start anew. Let's enter the dawn of a new
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else, on 02-Apr-2005 at 16:34 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote: It's pretty good said I admit, but am confused over your addressing to me, that is to my message, you para-reply to, to say so, since plainly *no* comment you exposed here is relating to what *I* wrote. But of course you mentioned the free scanner AntiVir, and it had a poor detection rate whenever I had the chance to compare it with other AV products. I made this experience myself, and thus I allowed myself to bring up the point against this particular scanner that you mentioned, and I allowed myself to start with a more general contribution to the AV software thread. Now, in your very special way you sound as if you're slightly offended by that. You don't need to. It may be that you are, right now, infected with a virus, trojan, or adware dropper (while you are lulled in false safety) because you are using an antivirus software that is insecure. depends exclusively on User as the crucial point in the entire AV system since it is governed -- by the User. No higher intelligence is present in there, and hence no a best software. The higher intelligence behind any AV program is the vendor that supplies the updates to the virus database of the program, and the update mechanism, two things that are completely out of the users choice if he or she is led to the wrong program because of recommendations based on the wrong parameters. Someone might screw entire system up, using the best and most expensive software around (sounds familiar, you work in a service, no?), while someone else might make quite solidly protected system using almost -- anything! I do not object. The best software isn't necessarily the most expensive. But you're missing the point. The current state regarding the AV programs is: the free scanners can not compete with the ones you have to pay for. Its a simply as that. I've made this experience myself not only once, but on various occasions with various (Windows based) systems (and I tried the three free scanners AVG, AntiVir and BitDefender Free Edition). That may change in the future maybe, with joined efforts of an open source or freeware community, but it is not the case now. So let's not be deluded much about perfection and the best whatever in the realm of software, and especially of the sensitive one, as AV an similar ones are. (-; Its not about perfection or bestestness (ungh) or sensitivity. Its simply about security. And while I enjoy your style and way of writing very much, and since I am always happy if I can recommend a free alternative to (sometimes very expensive) software, when it comes to security, I see no room for such a discussion. As I said above, the current situation with AV programs leaves, security-wise, no choice for a free program. Testings also serve, in a fine amount, to *sell* the product, as the main goal, and are *not* objective all the way. In other words, they like to lie, and they do that. Like any hyperactive addicted seller. (-: Thats why I wrote people should read not only one test, but at least three. And, I'm not providing test results that I gained in a test-situation, I just share the experience I made in a non-test situation. There is no a special avail in writing if it is not read, or is not done attentively. For instance, how do you succeed to see things I didn't write in my message you are meta-para-replying to? (-: Well, these things happen on a public mailinglist. If I had anything to say to your personally, I would've written a PM. I know, I know...it's not a big problem, you just mixed your legs, and it happens (to beings of many legs). Just remix them and try this again. I did not mix my legs. I just wanted to add to the AV software discussion, and I already explained why I picked your message for my reply. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) I suspect that most of us get old without growing up, and that inside every adult (sometimes not very far inside) is a bratty kid who wants everything his own way. (Bill Watterson) Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Alexander, On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 13:21:26 +0200 (6:21 AM here), Alexander S. Kunz [ASK] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ASK To make it clear: AntiVir removed 87 malware files, but it did ASK not clean the machine. ASK I want to add my very personal opinion here: the program may be ASK free, but it is useless. Realistically I don't think I would rely on any AV software to be my sole defence. While its true you often get what you pay for, I think a reasonable defence can be built for free. Not all AV programs are effective for intercepting spyware. If one uses several product some reasonable wall of protection can be built. ie: router software firewall MS Antispyware (active) Spybot SD (resident) SpywareGuard SpywareBlaster Ad-Aware with frequent scans Firefox All should be updated frequently and scanners should be run on a regular schedule. It also helps to use a free utility like Active Ports to examine which software is using inbound/outbound ports. If wireless, something like AirSnare is useful for ensuring no unauthorized systems are connected. Most of us spend a fair amount of money on our hardware and Internet access. Buying a decent AV package should be part of the process. Yes, you can do it for free, but is it worth the risk? I would still use the auxiliary measures listed above no matter what AV I selected. In today's world, there's no such thing as too safe. - -- Kevin Coates Dewitt, NY USA Using TB! v3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1.2600 SP2 (see kludges for my pgp key) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCTtcOvZSrVDqOXK0RAp2RAKCC8qT9eggniUwiiukq6p4jIm+1qQCg8Dg5 PlnTbuWxpXDEXEcGjm5cOAQ= =WT6L -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Kevin Coates everyone else, on 02-Apr-2005 at 19:31 you (Kevin Coates) wrote: Realistically I don't think I would rely on any AV software to be my sole defence. A good virus scanner is only one part of a complete security strategy, and you named a couple of very good additional programs (and conception) that I use myself, too. :-) While its true you often get what you pay for, I think a reasonable defence can be built for free. Not all AV programs are effective for intercepting spyware. You are of course right. Currently, dealing with ad- and spyware requires separate programs (Mica: free programs, oh yes ;-). I can imagine that more and more AV program vendors will include complete spyware removal into their products in the future, because ad- and spyware becomes more and more virus (or trojan) like. For anyone who's interested, there's a nice set of articles by Tom Liston of ISC that describes the problem: part 1 english: http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?date=2004-07-23 german translation: http://www.heise.de/security/artikel/49687 (part 1) (its a total of 4 articles until now, you'll find the follow-ups on the same pages...) Most of us spend a fair amount of money on our hardware and Internet access. Buying a decent AV package should be part of the process. Yes, you can do it for free, but is it worth the risk? I rest my case. :-) -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Shaw's Principle: Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will want to use it. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sat, 2 Apr 2005, @ @ at 18:41:31 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: Now, in your very special way you sound as if you're slightly offended by that. Nononononononoono... (-: I am not offended at all, nor am angry with you. I'll say just this shortly since I have to go out for a ride, and will reply to other technical f...s sometime later. We (in general) just have certain problems in communication, and *this* is the part which irritates me, I admit, occasionally: messages are read generally in a pretty shallow fashion, and readers are prone to react to some fragments, and phrases, rather than to *think* before this spontaneous explosion. It is a matter of a haste, and...well, of some global nervousness. The f..t that we can get and send messages so quickly all over the globe, doesn't mean that we have to *read* them this way. Easy, relax. If some are more complicated, or longer, let's give them some time more for treatment. Will be less of confusion and of wrong responses. And, you are one of my favorite members (so you are warned now (-; ) I hardly could get angry with; if is not so, would I talk with your tags every little while? Obviously not. (-: Off to wheel(s) now! - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 213 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCTuOs9q62QPd3XuIRAgyKAJ9qEDIbg3uTwG0WOeTp/vKiYdSpigCfZgEC yPiZvdAbsRaFWJ4e/alYf9I= =mDM4 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sat, 2 Apr 2005, @ @ at 20:25:53 +0200, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote: While its true you often get what you pay for, I think a reasonable defence can be built for free. Not all AV programs are effective for intercepting spyware. You are of course right. Currently, dealing with ad- and spyware requires separate programs (Mica: free programs, oh yes ;-). Did I say I'll be back? No? Sorry. (-: I see you haven't read my passage about *the* free software I refer to, *yet*, starting with And just a and ending with I do that. No, I am not angry, still. (-: This would be just a your negligence your loss, and a my oh well. But if I would write you a *love* letter, and perhaps even asking will you marry me, *and* if you would read it the way you read, and think about, with an adequate to this reply to me, then I wouldn't be just angry, but would be *mad*, mad like a lynx, this big one, and *that* mad that even a look of mine would be enough for you to get the message; to say nothing about *feather* which would fly around few days until it give up under the recommendation of gravitation. I'll give you few days more for a better examination of this message of mine. (-: Sleep well. - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 213 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my From|Reply To field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCTxqL9q62QPd3XuIRAjoBAKCajN+cQRe/yr9yAFYn1zrNk9dQOwCcDanm ys0yz5TEZjma+5j6yrXdm64= =6/8T -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else, on 03-Apr-2005 at 00:19 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote: I see you haven't read my passage about *the* free software I refer to, *yet*, starting with And just a and ending with I do that. I read that, but how could I know about your views after reading your first message? Nevertheless, I replied to the parts of your message that were relevant to me. Not because I'm hasty or I didn't understand you, but to make my point clearer (I often find myself wrestling with the english words to express what I really mean, I'm not a native speaker). You know that people tend to defend their software, point of view, whatever, even when it was - hmmm - proven wrong, thats why I thought you were probably angry, since I said AntiVir is useless. This perhaps leads to a meta discussion about the different types and motivations of free software, and it was not my intention to lead the discussion into that direction. My intention was only to state a bold be aware when talking about free-of-cost antivirus programs. since in that context, I found no free software that serves the purpose well enough; and another be aware seeing how easily people recommend this or that program, just because they like it - and this personal liking often goes beyond functionality and/or reason. Hope you had a nice ride. :-) -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Things always seem darkest just before the bottom drops out. -- Arthur Lifshin Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Anti Virus S/W
MFPA [M] wrote, snipped a bit M Never tried nod32 but since I switched to AVG7 when Pc-Cillin 2000 M stopped working I find my machine is much slower; almost unuseable M when AVG is doing a system scan. No problem here. I barely even know that it's doing a scan except for hearing the HD running and seeing the icon on the taskbar. -- Regards, Ron Secord Using TB! 3.0.9.10 Return Under Windows XP 5.1 Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
