No answers Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Roelof, On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 19:17:39 +0100GMT (10-11-02, 19:17 +0100GMT, where I live), you wrote: O> I would like to ask if nobody can answer my original question: O> does one have to re-activate AVG and/or its TB plug in after O> installing a new version of TB! over an older one? R>>Do

DEAD HORSE (was AVG plug in after re-installing?)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi John, @13-Nov-2002, 15:27 +0900 (06:27 UK time) John De Hoog said: > As for outgoing connections, I don't want to stop them entirely, > not when it is at the expense of running useful programs like > Website-Watcher. I am really sad to have to d

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Scott Thank you for your email dated Wednesday, November 13, 2002, 6:22:19 AM, in which you wrote: SJ> Don't believe everything you read on the Net. I don't (Marck, Allie, Januk, Melissa, etc. excepted!) If you re-read my original post you will see that I only praised Gibson's assemble

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Scott Johnson wrote... >A con man makes what he is saying seem very logical. Our job here is >to figure out which site to believe. (or are both conveying a partial >truth...with the full truth lying somewhere in between?) Steve Gibson has some useful information about configuring your system, b

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Scott Johnson wrote... >I don't run Norton antivirus, but I don't believe it protects against >outgoing connections. It can scan for a virus on your system or to >see if there is one in an outbound Email(?) which is good, but that >doesn't protect against a virus that has snuck through the defens

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

William, r>> What a fraud. WM> What did I tell you? :-) Don't believe everything you read on the Net. For every web site that says one thing, I'd wager I can find one that says nearly the opposite. A con man makes what he is saying seem very logical. Our job here is to figure out which site

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

John, JDH> For outgoing protection: Norton Anti-Virus. JDH> For general protection, a *hardware* firewall built into my LAN JDH> router, as well as the firewall built into Windows XP. I don't run Norton antivirus, but I don't believe it protects against outgoing connections. It can scan for a

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello rick Thank you for your email dated Wednesday, November 13, 2002, 1:34:10 AM, in which you wrote: r> What a fraud. What did I tell you? :-) -- Regards William Flying with The Bat! www.ritlabs.com/the_bat Windows 2000 Pro 2195 Service Pack 2 __

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Scott Johnson wrote... >The problem with not running a software firewall of some sort is that >you have no controll over your OUTGOING internet connection. >Zonealarm and Tiny Personal Firewall both do this and if you do become >infected with a virus (bite my tongue) the firewall will notify you >

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

John, JDH> (1) Most people using it could achieve all the necessary protection JDH> just by configuring their systems properly; The problem with not running a software firewall of some sort is that you have no controll over your OUTGOING internet connection. Zonealarm and Tiny Personal Firewall b

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Anne wrote... >So why is Zone Alarm so bad? And what troubles does it cause for >people? It's bad because: (1) Most people using it could achieve all the necessary protection just by configuring their systems properly; (2) It sends out warnings about possible "attacks" that are normal system b

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Wednesday, November 13, 2002, 1:55:37 AM, John wrote in message mid:VPOP31.5.0d.20021113105537.687.18.2.64410165@;SUPERSOHO JDH> The pity is that he is responsible for so many people needlessly JDH> saddling their systems with Zone Alarm, which causes many more JDH> troubles than it could possib

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

rick wrote... >I think www.grcsucks.com explains my position on the gentlemen in >question. He is a slick marketing person and that is about it. No one >in respected security circles has any respect for him. What a fraud. The pity is that he is responsible for so many people needlessly saddling

Re[3]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Anne, Tuesday, November 12, 2002, 7:51:24 PM, you wrote: A> Tuesday, November 12, 2002, 5:08:34 PM, William wrote in message A> mid:302427800.20021112170834@;dsl.pipex.com WM>> If you are interested, have a look at www.grc.com in general and WM>> http://grc.com/smgassembly.htm in particula

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Tuesday, November 12, 2002, 5:08:34 PM, William wrote in message mid:302427800.20021112170834@;dsl.pipex.com WM> If you are interested, have a look at www.grc.com in general and WM> http://grc.com/smgassembly.htm in particular. WM> All Gibson's software is written in assembler and it flies. It's

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Anne Thank you for your email dated Tuesday, November 12, 2002, 3:33:09 PM, in which you wrote: A> ...many of the great little fast proggies we use are written in A> assembler as well so we're already fans of this. In fact both my son A> and I would love to fathom out how to write this o

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Sunday, November 10, 2002, 9:20:51 PM, William wrote in message mid:15345369327.20021110212051@;dsl.pipex.com WM> The main reason for this is because the important bits are written in WM> assembler. Shame it's gone out of fashion. Too difficult for today's WM> programmers I suppose. Now, back in t

Re[4]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello DG, Monday, November 11, 2002, 9:51:10 PM, you wrote: DRS> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- DRS> Hash: SHA1 DRS> Monday, November 11, 2002 DRS> 9:37:21 PM DRS> RE: "AVG plug in after re-installing?" DRS> Greetings rick, DRS> On Saturday, November 9,

Re[3]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Monday, November 11, 2002 9:37:21 PM RE: "AVG plug in after re-installing?" Greetings rick, On Saturday, November 9, 2002, 1:37:44 PM, you wrote: r> If you read the url I posted to thomas, r> http://www.virusbtn.com/magazine/a

DEAD HORSE (was AVG plug in after re-installing?)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Clive, @11-Nov-2002, 16:12 Clive Taylor [CT] in mid:711312593.2002161213@;ukf.net said: CT> But there must be a degree of inertia here that benefits the CT> company supplying the computer and net connection. ... Note: This moderator's int

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

11 November 2002, 15:27, you wrote: DW> Not really - in the UK you can choose to pay-as-you-go with most ISPs, DW> so you can have accounts with as many ISPs as you wish. But there must be a degree of inertia here that benefits the company supplying the computer and net connection. After all, if

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

On Monday, November 11, 2002, 2:55:24 PM, Clive Taylor wrote: CT> It's an interesting model -- and I suppose it has the advantage of CT> "locking in" customers to their own ISP services. Not really - in the UK you can choose to pay-as-you-go with most ISPs, so you can have accounts with as many I

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

11 November 2002, 13:48, you wrote: DRS> there are 3 local ISP's who furnish dialup access (Berkshirenet, DRS> Vgernet and Berkshire County Network (BCN)) and all build DRS> systems, upgrade systems and provide service, support and DRS> warranty besides their main bread & butter business which is

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Monday, November 11, 2002 8:39:34 AM RE: "AVG plug in after re-installing?" Greetings Clive, On Monday, November 11, 2002, 2:52:51 AM, you wrote: CT> Curious to know why a ISP should be in the business of building and CT> supportin

Re[2]: OT local ISP building computer from generic parts [was, Re[2]:AVG plug in after re-installing?]

Hello Clive, Monday, November 11, 2002, 6:49:41 AM, you wrote: MB>> I'm still open to input on the specifications for my new system. CT> Interesting, but since I'm in the UK there's probably nothing useful I CT> can contribute. That's okay. Thanks anyway. -- Best regards, Mary __

Re: OT local ISP building computer from generic parts [was, Re[2]:AVG plug in after re-installing?]

11 November 2002, 10:22, you wrote: MB> Any further discussion OT on this thread--carry on privately or on MB> tbot? I'm still open to input on the specifications for my new system. Interesting, but since I'm in the UK there's probably nothing useful I can contribute. -- Clive Taylor Using The

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

10 November 2002, 20:20, you wrote: MB> I'm about to hire my local ISP (who have given me reliable MB> trustworthy service for 5 years) to build my dream machine MB> for me. Curious to know why a ISP should be in the business of building and supporting PCs. How local is this ISP? What computer

Re: No answers Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hallo Ochrid, On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 19:17:39 +0100GMT (10-11-02, 19:17 +0100GMT, where I live), you wrote: O> I would like to ask if nobody can answer my original question: O> does one have to re-activate AVG and/or its TB plug in after O> installing a new version of TB! over an older one? Do you

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Anne Thank you for your email dated Sunday, November 10, 2002, 2:43:25 AM, in which you wrote: A> He is evaluating Nod32 at the moment, is incredibly impressed with both the speed and the A> lack of hogging resources. The main reason for this is because the important bits are written i

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing? (OT)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Allie, On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 12:29:30 -0500 your time, you authored this: ACM> Well, this opinion sounds like what Simon may have thought I had during ACM> our exchange in the past. Actually, it's not in large part. The only ACM> part I agree w

Re[5]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Spike, Sunday, November 10, 2002, 1:06:42 PM, you wrote: S> Hello Anne, S> On or about Sunday, November 10, 2002, 12:49:14 PM, in a galaxy S> far, far away, Anne wrote: S> In other words yes, I have this down to a science. I should, as S> I have been building my own machines since the

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello there, Sunday, November 10, 2002, 9:55:23 PM, Marck D Pearlstone wrote: AC>> ... If an unknowledgeable user had restored a system AC>> configuration using the infected cpy files, the laptop would AC>> get infected once again. MDP> At this time the AV software has previously failed and miss

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Alexander, @10-Nov-2002, 20:03 +0200 (18:03 UK time) Alexander Cicovic [AC] in mid:160947502.20021110200317@;gmx.net said: MDP>> <...> AV software spotting a viral infection in a file with a MDP>> non-executable extension. This is not a risk to an

Re[4]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Anne, On or about Sunday, November 10, 2002, 12:49:14 PM, in a galaxy far, far away, Anne wrote: A> Er that's OK insofar as TB! and e-mail goes Spike, but to say that A> an AV is unnecessary because one runs TB! is overlooking the fact that A> virus can be introduced to a system in oth

No answers Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello all, >>Before this becomes a dead horse... I would like to ask if nobody can answer my original question: does one have to re-activate AVG and/or its TB plug in after installing a new version of TB! over an older one? What I find on this subject in the TBUDL Archive goes for al large part

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello there, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 4:04:53 PM, Marck D Pearlstone wrote: MDP> <...> AV software spotting a viral infection in a file with a MDP> non-executable extension. This is not a risk to anyone - MDP> professional or not. <...> Before this becomes a dead horse I just wanted to make a

Re[3]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Sunday, November 10, 2002, 4:24:52 PM, Spike wrote in message mid:187358835327.20021110112452@;candw.ky S> I run The Bat! e-mail client so that I don't HAVE to run ANY S> anti-virus BS. Er that's OK insofar as TB! and e-mail goes Spike, but to say that an AV is unnecessary because one runs

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In , Spike [S] wrote:' S> I run The Bat! e-mail client so that I don't HAVE to run ANY S> anti-virus BS. Any anti-virus steals 12-20% of system resources S> and slows down system performance. I know ALL avenu

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello rick, On or about Saturday, November 9, 2002, 6:26:04 AM, in a galaxy far, far away, rick wrote: r> I would recommend you to use Nod32. It has the best results of any r> product tested at virus bulletin. I use Nod32 in conjunction with r> TheBat! and I have never had one virus problem. I

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Paul, PC> Like you said, I pretty much know when a virus is sent, but it PC> scares me when my close friends send me attachments, because most of PC> them are virus-clueless, and they send those chain letters out PC> constantly, and hoax virus warnings, without checking SNOPES.com . I've

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

On Sunday, November 10, 2002, 12:04 AM, you wrote: SJ> Klez. The moral here is not to expect software to take care of SJ> everything. Stay current with antiviral news and help out a little. oh, no problem there, I read all sorts of newsletters, langalist, tourbus, tbot, tbudl... and I have ALW

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Paul, r>> Theres an old saying, "you get what you pay for" PC> AVG does have a PAY - PRO version, so everything they do isn't for free, PC> and both the free & pay programs probably use the same virus definition PC> files. Most times, I AGREE you get what you pay for, but with virus PC> program

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Doug, On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 19:17:21 + GMT (10/11/02, 02:17 +0700 GMT), Doug Weller wrote: > Actually PC-Cillin passed the November 2002 Virus Bulletin test. I > use PC-Cillin as my main virus checker and AVG plugin with TheBat! > I've been virus free so far. I have been using PC-Cillin

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello rick, On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 13:40:05 -0500 GMT (10/11/02, 01:40 +0700 GMT), rick wrote: TF>> Well spotted. There goes the "independence" claim. My philosophy (and TF>> this has to do with economics rather than computing) is that no TF>> company that needs sponsors or advertising customers can

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Allie, On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 11:18:56 -0500 GMT (09/11/02, 23:18 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote: > I'm wondering then, why quote these sites at all since I doubt the > skepticism would have been there about the quality of the tests if > AVG had passed most of them rather than failed most of

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

On Saturday, November 9, 2002, 9:43 PM, you wrote: PC>> I recommend AVG to all my friends, most of whom had Mcafee or Norton PC>> installed on their PC's, but had let the coverage lapse because of the PC>> subscription cost. better to have an up-to-date AVG than a year-old PC>> Norton:) r> viru

Re[3]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Saturday, November 9, 2002, 6:28:56 PM, rick wrote in message mid:131295789272.20021109132856@;adelphia.net r> Nod32 not only detects all in-the-wild viruses but it does it fast. r> Nod32 scanned 260 gigs in 15 minutes!! Just to add to this - as a Kaspersky user which my online-gaming teenage so

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Paul, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 9:22:52 PM, you wrote: PC> noted on the Grisoft site: PC> Update 399 was withdrawed because of problems PC> with Resident Shield on Windows NT or higher systems. Repaired update PC> will be available soon. - October 10, 2002 - PC> that might be why they

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

On Saturday, November 9, 2002, 1:37 PM, you wrote: r> If you read the url I posted to thomas, r> http://www.virusbtn.com/magazine/archives/pdf/2002/200206.pdf on page r> 19 (pdf document) virus bulletin review explains clearly why they used r> a older version of grisoft for the tests. There appe

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In , Allie Martin [AM] wrote:' AM> Did you see my response to this comment. I did a test with AM> DrWeb's plugin on a MIME digest containing a message with the AM> eicar test virus attached. DrWeb picke

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hi Thomas, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 12:57:57 PM, you wrote: [SNIP] > I turns out that there is no good product in the market. Even F-Secure > has 9 passes against 11 failures. PC-Cillin appears to be unusable > (well, it was one of the best when I bought it, as I checked several > such compar

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi rick, @9-Nov-2002, 13:37 -0500 (18:37 UK time) rick [R] in mid:116296317071.20021109133744@;adelphia.net said: R> If you read the url I posted to thomas, R> http://www.virusbtn.com/magazine/archives/pdf/2002/200206.pdf on R> page 19 (pdf document)

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Thomas, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 9:15:29 AM, you wrote: >> I find it interesting that the sponsors of VB2002 were ESET, the >> makers of NOD32, among others, such as Computer Associates, Sophos, >> also a AV maker. TF> Well spotted. There goes the "independence" claim. My philosophy (

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Paul, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 9:06:20 AM, you wrote: PC> On Saturday, November 9, 2002, 8:43 AM, you wrote: MDP>>> This is a major concern. I would accept their findings without MDP>>> hesitation if it was clearer just how they had been arrived at. PN>> While it might not provide

Re[2]: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Thomas, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 7:57:57 AM, you wrote: Virus bulletin tests in-the-wild viruses. Their methodoloy is clearly stated in their publication. http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/about/index.xml this url states what they test for i.e. in-the-wild viruses. This url http://www.virusb

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In , Perry Nelson [PN] wrote:' ACM>> I'm wondering then, why quote these sites at all since I doubt ACM>> the skepticism would have been there about the quality of the ACM>> tests if AVG had passed most of t

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hi Allie, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 11:18:56 AM, you wrote: ACM> I'm wondering then, why quote these sites at all since I doubt the ACM> skepticism would have been there about the quality of the tests if ACM> AVG had passed most of them rather than failed most of them. I don't use either of

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In , Perry Nelson [PN] wrote:' PN> Which is why I found it interesting. However it should be noted PN> in fairness that the "sponsorship" was of the VB2002 conference PN> in New Orleans, not necessarily of t

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hi Thomas, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 9:15:29 AM, you wrote: >> I find it interesting that the sponsors of VB2002 were ESET, the >> makers of NOD32, among others, such as Computer Associates, Sophos, >> also a AV maker. TF> Well spotted. There goes the "independence" claim. My philosophy (and T

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In , Marek Mikus [MM] wrote:' MM> NOD32 is very good product, I know developers as I know MM> developers from Grisoft and I recommend it too. But problems MM> with Eicar are not on AVG's side, but on TB's side :

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Perry, On Sat, 09 Nov 2002 08:43:39 -0500 GMT (09/11/02, 20:43 +0700 GMT), Perry Nelson wrote: > While it might not provide sufficient technical detail to satisfy > your curiosity, here is the link to the description of their > procedure. > http://toronto.virusbtn.com/vb100/about/1

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

On Saturday, November 9, 2002, 8:43 AM, you wrote: MDP>> This is a major concern. I would accept their findings without MDP>> hesitation if it was clearer just how they had been arrived at. PN> While it might not provide sufficient technical detail to satisfy PN> your curiosity, here is the

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Perry, @09-Nov-2002, 08:43 -0500 (13:43 UK time) Perry Nelson [PN] in mid:2753230839.20021109084339@;comcast.net said: PN> While it might not provide sufficient technical detail to PN> satisfy your curiosity, here is the link to the descriptio

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello all, Saturday, November 9, 2002, rick wrote: > Please point your browser to the very reputable/independent virus > testing lab - virus bulletin > http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?avg.xml > This lab tests virus products from all vendors who wish to have their > product test

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello all, Saturday, November 9, 2002, Ochrid wrote: > (I am asking because the only thing that had changed before AVG > failed to detect John eicar-file, was the installation of TB > 1.62b7. All settings seemed to have been kept, but only after I > looked at - and thus clicked the 'configuration

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing? (SOT)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Simon, @9-Nov-2002, 13:37 Simon said: MDP>> I hope that we can get a response from Grisoft on this MDP>> issue. I like AVG as a virus scanner and it has always worked MDP>> very well for me. > Do you use the retail version of AVG or the free

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

On Saturday, November 9, 2002, 8:19 AM, you wrote: MDP> I can see no indication elsewhere of the reputability of this site. MDP> I have written to Grisoft and asked them to provide an official MDP> response to our readership. I mean really, this site goes back 2 years to DOS editions, what do t

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hi Marck, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 8:19:02 AM, you wrote: TF>> I tried to find out what exactly they tested, ... doesn't seem TF>> to disclose their methodology. TF>> ... I just wonder how accurate the website is that you seem to TF>> trust so much. Kindly enlighten me as to their reputabilit

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing? (SOT)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Marck, On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 13:19:02 + your time, you authored this: MDP> I hope that we can get a response from Grisoft on this issue. I like MDP> AVG as a virus scanner and it has always worked very well for me. Do you use the retail

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Thomas, @9-Nov-2002, 19:57 +0700 (12:57 UK time) Thomas Fernandez [TF] in mid:15019495647.20021109195757@;gmx.net said: >> http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?avg.xml TF> I am not so sure about "reputable", as I have never heard o

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello rick, On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 06:26:04 -0500 GMT (09/11/02, 18:26 +0700 GMT), rick wrote: > Ok I am new so I will make this as painless as possible. Why do people > use this AVG product? I have seen quite a few threads about it and am > concerned for my fellow TheBat! users. Since I am looking

Re: AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello Ochrid, Saturday, November 9, 2002, 5:47:21 AM, you wrote: O> Hello all, O> Is it possible that the AVG plug in for The Bat! needs to be O> re-activated after a new version of The Bat! has been installed O> over an older one? Ok I am new so I will make this as painless as possible. Why do

AVG plug in after re-installing?

Hello all, Is it possible that the AVG plug in for The Bat! needs to be re-activated after a new version of The Bat! has been installed over an older one? (I am asking because the only thing that had changed before AVG failed to detect John eicar-file, was the installation of TB 1.62b7. All setti