Re[2]: AVG didn't catch

2002-07-17 Thread Michael Thompson

Hello Marck,

Wednesday, July 17, 2002, 4:56:02 AM, you wrote :


MDP We just said that in a long thread discussing the plug-in thesis. The
MDP middle man approach slows down *all* mail while plug-ins are only
MDP called when there is an attachment worth looking at.

MDP Please read the recent thread exploring these issue in depth under the
MDP topic OT: Antivirus software review.

Sorry, new to the list.

-- 
Best regards,
 Michael



Current Ver: 1.61
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/



Re[2]: AVG didn't catch

2002-07-17 Thread Pete Milne



Replying to your message of Tuesday, July 16, 2002, 9:20:26 PM:

MDP This is always going to be a problem with *any* AV software. Any new
MDP variants and especially a completely new virus won't be spotted until
MDP at least one person reports it to the AV vendor for them to update their
MDP database and issue a new one.

Hey Marck,

This is true only if you have an anti virus that is based on daily
signatures to be effective. If you have a solution that is based on rule
sets and policies, as well as signatures, your vulnerability will be
greatly decreased.

-- 

 Pete

 www.milneweb.com
 
 Tuesday, July 16, 2002
 10:04:07 AM   

 This e-mail is brought to you by:
 The Bat: Version 1.61   
 Windows 2000 build 2195
 Service Pack 2



Current Ver: 1.61
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/



Re[2]: AVG didn't catch

2002-07-17 Thread Pete Milne



Replying to your message of Wednesday, July 17, 2002, 10:41:35 AM:

MDP Let's
MDP not have any more of the hype here please.

Hypehow do you mean that??

For example, there is a new virus written tonight.  This virus is delivered
in a .pif attachment (like Klez is).  Tomorrow comes, if you are using XYZ anti virus 
and
it is based solely on signature updates, unless you get the days update you are
vulnerable to this virus.  Me on the other hand, I use LMN anti virus which
is based on signatures, rules sets and policies.  This solution is set
so it will not allow any .pif attachments to get to my email client.  Therefore if
I don't get the daily update for some reason, I am protected from this
virus regardless.

How does this rate as a false security?

-- 

 Pete

 www.milneweb.com
 
 Wednesday, July 17, 2002
 2:33:16 PM   

 This e-mail is brought to you by:
 The Bat: Version 1.61   
 Windows 2000 build 2195
 Service Pack 2



Current Ver: 1.61
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/



Re[2]: AVG didn't catch

2002-07-17 Thread Pete Milne



Replying to your message of Wednesday, July 17, 2002, 3:34:44 PM:

MDP Yes, but my email client doesn't let me execute .pifs anyway (not
MDP without a fight) ... nor does my brain! This is a bit of a pointless
MDP and valueless example really. Your LMN AV doesn't do anything common
MDP sense wasn't doing in the first place.

Marck,

You mentioned a quality that I don't get to deal with often in
clientscommon sense.  That totally changes the whole scenario.  Most
individuals (including some techy people) I deal with shouldn't even own
a computer let alone do email!!  They automatically see an attachment like
the one Microsoft sent out that said it was a patch...in an .EXE form.
Lot's of them opened it and were screwed.

-- 

 Pete

 www.milneweb.com
 
 Wednesday, July 17, 2002
 6:24:13 PM   

 This e-mail is brought to you by:
 The Bat: Version 1.61   
 Windows 2000 build 2195
 Service Pack 2



Current Ver: 1.61
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/



Re[2]: AVG didn't catch

2002-07-16 Thread Michael Thompson

Hello Marck,

Wednesday, July 17, 2002, 4:20:26 AM, you wrote:

MDP -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
MDP Hash: SHA1

MDP Hi Rick,

MDP @17 July 2002, 21:54 -0400 (02:54 UK time)  Rick Reumann [RR] in
MDP [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Bat List:

RR Has anyone else ever received the W32.Frethem.E@mm  worm virus? I
RR didn't run the exe but it slipped passed AVG with the
RR decrypt-password.exe. I thought AVG was supposed to be pretty good.
RR I'm surprised this high-profile got by. Should I maybe switch to some
RR other protection? (AVG has caught other viruses so it does work and it
RR was just updated yesterday).

MDP ,-=[ From the Grisoft site ]-
MDP Update 377 available. Added detection of three new variants of
MDP I-Worm/Frethem. - July 15, 2002 -
MDP `

MDP Since there are new variants only a few days old it is no surprise
MDP that AVG didn't spot the infection. I have just updated and one that
MDP got through on Monday is spotted now.

MDP This is always going to be a problem with *any* AV software. Any new
MDP variants and especially a completely new virus won't be spotted until
MDP at least one person reports it to the AV vendor for them to update their
MDP database and issue a new one.

MDP - --
MDP Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- List moderator
MDP TB! v1.61 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2
MDP '

MDP '
MDP -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
MDP Version: GnuPG v1.1.90-nr1 (Windows 2000)

MDP iD8DBQE9NOJ8OeQkq5KdzaARAgY8AJ95PZgHxJ3N6a4x7GCdkAsTi6JHogCg+Npq
MDP oMsadVZ1DKFGCDY5UGaw2jw=
MDP =AVl6
MDP -END PGP SIGNATURE-



MDP 
MDP Current Ver: 1.61
MDP FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
MDP Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MDP Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
MDP Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MDP TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MDP Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/

varients should still contain something in similar fashioon to the
origional, and still should be realised.

-- 
Best regards,
 Michael



Current Ver: 1.61
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/