ToxicGoddess sayed:
>On Mon, 02 May 2011 22:04:25 +1000, pacMAN <byteYa@ss.dipshit.invalid>
>wrote:
>
/snippage
>>There is *nobody* posting
>>to ABCP that holds expert status in
>>this field. Put no credibility to the garbage
>>you see spewed in ABCP on malware.
>
>I have tried both McAffee and Symantec and have never been overjoyed
>with either one, but at the end of the day, one does need something.
>Do you happen to have a particular favorite that you would suggest?
http://www.f-prot.com/download/home_user/
http://www.kaspersky.com/anti-virus_trial
>I have gotten bugs from downloads on easynews before, so I'm a little
>timid about downloading and not scanning first. I made that mistake
>once early on and it caused me a huge amount of grief because my
>computer was infected with something really nasty - can't remember the
>name at this second but it will come to me eventually. In any event, I
>have developed the habit of running a quick scan on eerything I
>download before I unzip it.
>
/nodding
Depending on the AV software used, that 'safe' action
can still miss malware buried in the archive.
As a general rule, unpacking a rAr or Zip is quite OK.
It is using the executable files packed in the archive
that requires caution.. and "scanning".
Archives that are packed as executables should only ever
be unpacked if obtained from trusted web sites.
Hopefully you will never see those around Usenet,
and definitely not in ABCP.
If it is not crystal clear to you (what I am saying here)
then feel free to say again where the mixup is.
>I am the one who asked for help with Click N Stitch, and I assure you
>I didn't do so in order to either waste the time of those who were so
>generous as to try to help me out, nor to create a bunch of
>nanny-wagging venom spewing amongst the usual nanny-wagging venom
>spewing suspects.
>
heh.. you can make that singular:-)
There is only one 'thing' today spewing garbage
advice into ABCP... IMO
He is easily spotted.
.. whatever..
You got that "help" with CnS, and you posted
this feedback, yeh?
------Message-ID: <h5trs6l6cgu6783divea0rpbv5rs332adh@4ax.com>
------So I turned off McAffee and unzipped the files again, installed the
------software and used the keygen. So far no problems, software is working,
------no boogers appear to be eating away at my hard drive. Yay!
.. and this was the upload by PostalPete that is sitting
over in <abdmc>??
>
>I am willing to listen to anyone who tries to help me or teach me
>anything and try my best to use that information to its best
>advantage. I think that's kind of the whole point of these newsgroups,
>isn't it?
>
You've got it :-)
And yet because it is both public and open anything
can be said.
So it is entirely up to the reader to sort the garbage
from useful info.
Sure the "Good Guys" can help folks with that, but it is very
often the case the miscreants don't just barge in, they
(or IT, as in the case of ABCP) have usually studied their target
and chosen the spiel which might be most acceptable to the
majority of people.
Message-ID: <%Dmzp.102$ZM2.48@newsfe19.iad>
Two swift mouse clicks on the link above will have Agent
gather that post and give you a full read of the content.
It is the very latest spew from our (ABCP) parasite
on this topic (at the time of writing this post).
The savvy reader will note there is never any references
given for the claims this edjut makes.
Make of it what you will, at face value.
I say this phrase alone screams "clueless idiot".
--modern day viruses--
.. but that is just my opinion :->
And that is what all this post is... opinion.
If you are following the discussions between
myself and Pixie you would have read I have
discontinued "Help" on these things for 2011.
I wont repeat the reasons but simply say it
is each persons responsibility to check out
information for themselves. As today malware
gets "old" very fast - sometimes within hours
of release - there are any number of trusted
avenues of obtaining reliable information.
http://antivirus.about.com/od/securitytips/a/emailsafety.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash#Criticism
http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/phony-web-certificates-issued-google-yahoo-skype-others-032311
Some people exist who make searching exploits
and malware a passion beyond practicality.. IMO
However these too are useful in providing feedback.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/14/1073877889610.html
And as said earlier.. there are newsgroups
------>>><alt.comp.anti-virus>.
------>>>Following posts around:
------>>>Dustin <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com>
------>>>comments will yield the most productive
------>>>information.
>
However to answer your
"Do you happen to
have a particular favorite that
you would suggest?"
today, I say there is no one standalone piece of
software which will cover your butt in all cases.
As we all know, computing today is all
about newest-best-fastest, and to hell with
the flavour of the soup, so to speak.
There is where the likes of McFee and
Symantac(Nortons) went horribly
wrong... IMO.
So, for myself, my systems.. network
connection is a process.
For many years I ran Linux mounted
systems with Windows programs ran under
wine. Hardware failures have been the
only major faults in many a year now.
Today with network changes I have
"enhanced" that with a complete change
in structure. One I consider impregnable,
"up or "down" the connection highway.
1. You buy your own modem router
which has a "hardware" firewall onboard,
and install that - can mean a lot of work in itself.
Pay no attention to ISPs that offer routers
and refuse to help you with yours.
http://www.cnet.com/topic-reviews/router.html
If you must have a "wireless" router than be
certain of two things before you buy.
1. The protocols for the security are updated
at least every 3 months or so.
2. The router has ethernet ports you can
use cable to hook another machine to.
For all the hype, my experience has been
that wireless is horrendously slow at higher
end BW use. Use cable for that need.
Do I need to say a wireless network
must be turned off when not in use
and also must have been "locked down"
when in use????
2. Mount an AV which offers a website
update on definitions and does not use those
annoying "your system is vulnerable" screen tags.
Both the links offered provide that option.
That said, I haven't purchased an AV in many
a year. My AV was written in 1996 and is still of
excellent use today.
All "scanning" features are turned off.
When I choose to scan a file ( as I see you do too)
I point the AV at the folder the file is in and run that
and a memory scan.
3. Mount a software firewall on your Windows
system, turning "Off" the MS offered tool.
There are any number of these available,
learning to use them can be a fun exercise.
http://www.firewall-net.com/en/conseal/install.php
http://www.kerio.com/control
I wont say what products I use as that in
itself is a security breach. I will say that
the whole system does evolve. You may
have to change out hardware and or software
to get to where you want.
For example.. McFee now distributes the
Conseal product. What that has now changed for
that firewall program I have no idea.
Symantec wrecked the Dr. Soloman AV program.
There is some example in that, for me :-/
Anything else, offered by suppliers as "oh this
does it all" you can be very sure is someone
who doesn't know selling you something you do
not need.
>Thanks! :-)
>
>B.
no worries, hope it all gives you food for
thought :-)
--
kit
|
|