Pam, It is definitely good, that is without question ... however, there is no guarantee that it alone will always protect you; it just makes it more difficult for them to get malware on to your pc. It was a good idea, but all and all, not very effective.
I am using Trojan Killer, based on virus signatures from Kaspersky labs, but the software is fairly accessible. I am also using MSE for a second opinion, so that if either one detects something, I'll work on figuring it out. Chip -----Original Message----- From: Talk [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pamela Dominguez via Talk Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 9:35 AM To: Chip Orange; Window-Eyes Discussion List Subject: Re: casperski antivirus I don't know that UAC is any good. I have never disabled my UAC, but this computer has been infected anyway. Pam. -----Original Message----- From: Chip Orange via Talk Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 12:29 PM To: Steve Jacobson ; Window-Eyes Discussion List Subject: RE: casperski antivirus Well ... one point about MSE is that it doesn't really even try to pretend it's in the same league of "the big boys", it's just a whole lot better than nothing. MS knows this and tries to suggest you also install more anti-malware. Something else we all should be doing is to make sure UAC is enabled. I don't find it too difficult to confirm I want a program to run now and again, and it may save you from a virus being able to install itself. Chip Chip Orange Florida Public Service Commission Computer Systems Analyst 850-413-6314 -----Original Message----- From: Talk [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Jacobson via Talk Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 9:44 AM To: 'Window-Eyes Discussion List' Subject: RE: casperski antivirus David, First, I am sorry to hear that you had to deal with an infection. Did you ever get any idea where you picked it up? I have struggled with the question of accessibility versus ratings and would be curious to here your thoughts on a couple if issues. First, I wonder if not being able to adequately interact with a highly rated package isn't going to reduce its effectiveness. If I can't use the interface, am I going to set up the options in a way that is most effective? If I can't read a warning message when a virus is encountered, am I going to make the right choice? I don't know if the above would apply to Casperski and not saying that it does, the question is meant to be generic. I've also read that ratings of virus checkers need to be considered carefully because enough is known about testing that virus checkers can tailor their protection to do well without it necessarily meaning much in terms of broad protection. Again, I am not saying Casperski does this, because I do not know that is the case. However, the whole state of viruses and virus checkers is so variable that I am not convinced one can pick a highly rated checker and know with any certainty that it is highly rated today as it was when the last tests came out. I can control to some extent whether I can pick a virus checker that I can use comfortably. Therefore, I don't know if the choice of accessibility versus effectiveness is truly as obvious as you describe it. Having said that, Casperski is common enough that I am glad you are dialogging with them. It would be nice if it were more accessible, and I, for one, would be very interested to hear what you hear from them and which areas you find to be useable and which you do not. Best regards, Steve Jacobson -----Original Message----- From: Talk [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Goldfield via Talk Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 2:25 PM To: Brice Mijares; Window-Eyes Discussion List Subject: Re: casperski antivirus I have never used Kaspersky with Window-Eyes. However, it may offer some degree of accessibility and it is the antimalware program I chose to use as of a few months ago, after Microsoft Security Essentials failed to protect me against a rather crippling virus. I use it because it is one of the top-rated antivirus packages on the market and I refuse to compromise my computer's security in the name of accessibility. I am, as some people may know, extremely passionate and a bit militant about this issue and I apologize if I come off too strong about this. However, blind people need to consider that we need to use the security software which is highly-rated, rather than choosing the package that works best with a screen reader but which may not offer an acceptable level of protection. I am trying to dialog with Kaspersky regarding these issues and I plan to continue to do so until accessibility is improved. I would like to strongly urge all of you to do the same. If one person contacts a company, they may be less inclined to act. If many of us contact them with the same concerns, particularly if we're paying customers, perhaps we'll get results which will be more favorable to us. So many of us, myself included, find it easier to choose a security program because it works best with whatever screen reader we happen to be using. When it comes to the security of my computer, that is no longer acceptable to me. For years, I relied upon MSE because it was speech-friendly. I'm also an extremely cautious, responsible and security-conscious user but these traits are no longer enough to keep you safe. I now insist on using security software which is highly-rated, meaning that it gets excellent scores with independent lab tests. If it's not accessible, I am willing to engage in constructive dialog with the company and I will go to incredible lengths to do this but, in the end my goal is to make it accessible. On 8/6/2015 2:45 PM, Brice Mijares via Talk wrote: > Not at all! My notebook running 8.1 came with it and after upgrading > yesterday to windows 10 I was glad to see it was gone. > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Casey via Talk" > <[email protected]> > To: "Window-Eyes Discussion List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 11:33 AM > Subject: casperski antivirus > > >> Hi just wondering is casperski antivirus useable with window-eyes? >> Last I heard it wasn't but just wondering if things changed or not in >> that regard. >> >> >> -- >> Casey >> _______________________________________________ >> Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the >> author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. >> >> For membership options, visit >> http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/bricemijares%4 0att.net. >> For subscription options, visit >> http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com >> List archives can be found at >> http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > > _______________________________________________ > Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the > author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. > > For membership options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/david.goldfiel d%40outlook.com. > For subscription options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > List archives can be found at > http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com -- Feel free to visit my Web site WWW.DavidGoldfield.info _______________________________________________ Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. For membership options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/steve.jacobson %40visi.com. For subscription options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com List archives can be found at http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com _______________________________________________ Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. For membership options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/corange%40psc. state.fl.us. For subscription options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com List archives can be found at http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com _______________________________________________ Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. For membership options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/geodom%40opton line.net. For subscription options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com List archives can be found at http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com _______________________________________________ Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. For membership options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/chip.orange%40 gmail.com. For subscription options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com List archives can be found at http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com _______________________________________________ Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. For membership options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/archive%40mail-archive.com. For subscription options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com List archives can be found at http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com
