-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Leif,
On Saturday, October 19, 2002, 4:16:22 AM, you authored this: LG> There have been numerous instances where one scanner detected a new LG> virus where the others didn't depending on which company put the LG> fingerprint into their signature files first. This is also my experience. It is also one of the reasons I stopped using McAfee as it used to fail to discover viruses, especially those that were doubled archived (I haven't used McAfee for ages so I would suspect that isn't a problem now) . An infected rar inside a zip would slip by McAfee unnoticed. I also used Trend Micro's scanner for ages and it managed to pick up on infected files more often than Norton and McAfee would. LG> I wouldn't recommend running multiple virus scanners simultaneously on LG> a single machine, but cross scanning on a network has proven most LG> valuable to me. Especially since most of the people who read my LG> newsletter have my editor address in their addressbook, which means LG> any virus/worm which exploits Lookout / Lookout Express will send me LG> an infected e-mail. I literally get *hundreds* of infected e-mail per LG> month. When Klez first hit the wild, I got over 240 infected e-mail in LG> two weeks. The Bat faithfully kept me nice and safe, and the virus LG> scanners quarantined all the bad stuff regardless of which machine LG> they were on. My experiences have proven to me that using more than one prophylactic improves the odds of discovery. I always scan any file that I receive with each installed scanner and then run a separate trojan scanner on it afterwards. To date, my systems have been stable with multiple scanners installed (but run manually), remained clean, and infected files have never got past the detection stage, or TB for that matter! Most of the infected files I get are via e-mail and so end up in the account's attachments folder and never get beyond there. However, I was manually scanning these folders before now, and so liked the idea of automating the task with the plugins when the feature was added from 1.60 onward. Anyhow, I still don't know whether TB! executes each plugin concurrently, or whether only the topmost plugin gets used :) - -- Sl�n, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk _______________________________________ Faffing about with TB! v1.61 on W2K SP3 PGP Key: http://pgp.netbanger.com/index.shtml -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your privacy with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPbFDeMtub/5cfolmEQLm6QCdHgdZ1xkEZq8tWREl2sImX8SmCrQAoMRe i8klCP1meJvE/MKFNc9yKEMm =mJFR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
