Need Recommendation - Page 2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View

Re: Need Recommendation

Duane Arnold wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

What like this? ;)

Ed.


Re: Need Recommendation

eddie_wood@hotmail.com says...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/professional/evaluation/sysreqs/default.asp
lists
64MB as the bare minimum for Windows 2000. We all know what that means - it
means have
at least 128Mb or be prepared to put up with very poor system response.
--
News: use seven bits;
or accept you cannot know
how it looks elsewhere.

Re: Need Recommendation


Befunge Sudoku wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/professional/evaluation/sysreqs/default.asp
lists
Quoted text here. Click to load it

A 64meg Windows 2000 machine will not have any problems running, say,
Outlook Express and AVG.


Re: Need Recommendation

eddie_wood@hotmail.com says...
Quoted text here. Click to load it
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/professional/evaluation/sysreqs/default.asp
lists
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Where I come from, we shoot poeple who run OE
--
News: use seven bits;
or accept you cannot know
how it looks elsewhere.

Re: Need Recommendation


Befunge Sudoku wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Paranoia is rife in this group!


Re: Need Recommendation

Duane Arnold > wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


"Absolute truth" is more like it. Lot's of people refuse to say "I don't
know how to do what you want by the route you are asking about, but you
can get the same results by..." which at least acknowledges the original
question.

Re: Need Recommendation

wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Since you prefer to listen to only responses that you want to hear,
I'll try to accomodate you (but probably not).

For email, you need background scanning like you need a hole
in the head, for one thing. Just make sure you select to use
plain text only, and delete all unsolicited email attackments.
Save other attachments to a test folder but wait a couple of
days before scanning them to give time for av vendors to
develop detection for new malware. Use the util for KAVDOS32
from my web site as one of your on-demand scanners. Use it
to scan all downloaded software.

Use a decent alternate browser such as Opera or Firefox,
make it the default browser, and avoid certain unsafe browsing
habits such as visiting porn sites and the like.

You're now in a position where having some second rate free
realtime antivirus underfoot is not going to increase malware
prevention enough to make it worth the drag on your
under-spec PC, especially since you said you use it primarily
for email.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg


Re: Need Recommendation

Art wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The hostility in this thread to towards the OP has me somewhat puzzled.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Using this method you may as well get your contacts to post it to you,
it would be quicker.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

If you are suggesting that free AV software is "second rate" then you
are mistaken.


Re: Need Recommendation


Quoted text here. Click to load it

The hostility to those of us who are trying to actually help is what
causes the hostility.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Using this method is by far the safest way to handle downloaded
software. It's called "safe hex". You can't rely on rely on realtime
scanners to detect new and "unknown" malware. The fact is that
reliance on realtime av for protection is precisely the way many
users take hits. We hear it here all the time. "My AVG (or whatever)
failed to catch ... blah blah" and they come here for help since their
av can't bail them out. It's really quite pitiful the way naive users
depend on their av to protect them rather than learn how to
protect themselves.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

No, I'm not mistaken. None of the ones with realtime scanning
capability compare favorably in detection with the best non-free
products. The closest one, perhaps, is Antivir which David
recommended.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg


Re: Need Recommendation

Art wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

However, it appears that the hostilty is directed at the OP for not
accepting that their machine is capable of running Windows 2000 with
64meg (which clearly it is).  This had *nothing* to do with the
original post asking advice on which free AV software to use.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

It is also unrealistic for your average user.  Waiting a couple of days
to open an email and then scanning it with an online scanner is
paranoid.  If you choose this method, good for you, but it is based on
paranoia and not nescessary.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Having used Avast, AVG and recently NOD32, I don't appear to have the
problems you describe.  This is despite my years of browsing very
"dodgy" sites.  Not one problem despite my reliance on realtime
scanning.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

So rather than help them you ridicule them?  What a nice welcome to new
users seeking advice.

Some so-called "experts" preach their method and criticise those that
don't agree with it, they have this superiority complex and believe
that mere mortals shouldn't be allowed near PCs because they are so
"naive".  Pathetic.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I couldn't give a rats-arse about comparisons.  They are meaningless
drivel with AV vendors developing their products to pass the equally
meaningless tests.  Only the anal get excited by them, you can picture
it now, sphincter boys all over the AV newsgroups feverishly waiting
for the next round of results.  My AV is better than your AV, blah blah
blah.  Jesus, get life.

My real World test is very simple.  After years of browsing porn,
downloading warez and passing emails around, is my machine infected?
No?  Well AVG/NOD32/whatever must be doing its job then.


Re: Need Recommendation


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I didn't say anything about online scanners, dimbulb. Nor did I say
to wait a couple of days before opening email. You're a perfect
example of why trying to help some here is a waste of time. Get
lost.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg


Re: Need Recommendation

Art wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quote "Save other attachments to a test folder but wait a couple of
days before scanning them to give time for av vendors to
develop detection for new malware."  End Quote.

I repeat that it is unrealistic for your average user to do this and it
is not nescessary for them to do so.


Re: Need Recommendation



[snipped "cooling off" scenario]

Quoted text here. Click to load it

If you don't use that method regarding incoming attachments, you might as
well not use AV at all. You will be susceptible to any zero day malware
going around.



Re: Need Recommendation

edgewalker wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

LMFAO so I guess I'll just tell my 200 users to wait a couple of days
before opening attachments then, that'll go down well.  Guys, get over
your paranoia and remove the tin foil from your heads!


Re: Need Recommendation


Quoted text here. Click to load it

The reason viral malware writers aim for that window is because your
200 users (and yourself - and to be honest millions of others) are leaving
it wide open.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Have fun with your next infection...



Re: Need Recommendation

edgewalker wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I'll also issue them with foil hats to protect them from alien rays,
you never know when we might be invaded.  I mean, just because it
hasn't happened, doesn't mean it will not.

Paranoia level reaching critical.


Re: Need Recommendation

wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That's rubbish. No (normal) user is going to wait two days before
opening attachments. If you're unlucky enough to get some zero day
malware then it's hard luck and you might have to revert to backups or
whatever. There is far more chance of the attachments containing known
malware so using some sort of av is always needed.


Jim.


Re: Need Recommendation


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Exactly, that is why email worms are so successful at spreading far and wide
within that window of opportunity.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Exactly, everyone should have a good backup plan and not have to worry
about damage caused by malware. They should only use AV for "prevention"
and it is not possible for any reactive AV in existence to prevent the day zero
malware execution. AV is primarily for prevention, not recovery, and not
allowing the defs to catch up with the new malware circumvents that function
with respect to day zero malware.

The same people that refuse to use that cooling off method are the ones that
value an AV with timely def updates because of that fact. Email worms will
continue to exploit this weakness in implementation of prevention methods,
and AV vendors will continue to compete for how quickly they can release
defs for new malware.

Why not just forget AV and use hardware implementations of recovery
schemes like some in the past jere have suggested? Why - because it is
not a preventative measure, and AV is, if used properly as Art suggested.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The idea is to prevent malware from running on the system, not to just
prevent 'some' malware from running on the system. Let others be the
early warning system (miners canary).



Re: Need Recommendation

wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I don't agree. I know that *nothing* can prevent *all* malware from
running on my machines. *Some* is as good as it gets and it's a
cocktail of measures which are required to keep the risk down. The
question is, where do you draw the line between minimising the risk
and also minimising the adverse effect this has on the rest of your
computer related activities? Or, if you prefer, what's paranoid and
what isn't?

For me, quarantining attachments until av definitions catch up is
serious overkill and out of the question. Hopefully my av will catch
most malware but I can never rely on it to catch new stuff so that's
why it's important to back up etc.

So should I do a second backup in case the first one goes pear shaped?
Possibly a good move. What about a third in case both the first two
somehow got corrupted? Maybe, but it's starting to seem a bit like
overkill. That decision will depend on the value assigned to the data
and the probability of losing it set against the time and effort taken
to make the extra backup. If it's just a matter of pressing a button
and waiting a few seconds then why not?

Apply the same reasoning to the quarantining of all attachments. The
seriously impaired user function in complying with such a requirement
far outweighs the miniscule added benefit it gives. Another case of
the tail wagging the dog.


Jim.


Re: Need Recommendation


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Depends on what the computer is being used for.  On a production server,=

no software should be executed, without thorough testing on a developmen=
t
system, where possible malware can do no harm to the production system.

On a home computer, it depends on whether or not you have financial
info, such as online banking in use.  If you do, then it's worth your
while to ensure you don't execute any new software that hasn't been
thouroughly scanned, several days after release.

If all you're using the computer for is email/web access/media center,
then all you have to worry about is your reputation with those in
your address book.

As with most anything to do with computers, the real answer is "it depen=
ds".

Regards, Dave Hodgins

-- =

Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)

Site Timeline