Science and Technology news... :: View topic

GregS · Guest

In article <y9RGk.50174$i92.19099@en-nntp-03.am2.easynews.com>, "john jardine" <john.jardine@idnet.co.uk> wrote:
[quote]
"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
message news:st6le4p4emi22jp32v9sg5t9edllvk06fr@4ax.com...

I>m biting the bullet and removing Symantec/Norton Antivirus.

What>s the recommended replacement?

...Jim Thompson

[...]

Maybe one a month I>ll run "Ad-aware" http://www.lavasoft.com/. Never finds
anything, hence I>ve no idea how good it is. Through total lack of interest
on my part I>m not even sure what it>s even supposed to be doing.
Presumably it does work as a couple of years ago it spotted a Trojan picked
up within a couple of minutes of installing my new broadband modem and thus
'incentivised' me (been watching too much recent TV :), to fit a firewall
prog 'ZoneAlarm'. (I>m on an original XP install).
Seems a well battened down firewall may be a key. I still visit the same
scummy/weird corners of the Internet and had enormous scum software
problems using Win95/98 but at that time had no firewall installed.
[/quote]
I use Ad-aware and the old Spybot. Spybot has been around for a long time. One
or the other catches different things. I have had to search for specific problems
on the web or groups. One problem, someone wrote a little program to remove
something I had for the Google search bug. I think the Microsoft malicious
software removal tool is a pain and does nothing.

greg

Eeyore · Guest

GregS wrote:

[quote]I think the Microsoft malicious software removal tool is a pain and does nothing.
[/quote]
Would be par for the course. IIRC they bought it from another software company, immediately disabled its 16 bit
capabilities that I>d have liked at the time for 98SE and then lost interest in it.

For 'lost interest in' read normal Microsoft development cycle.

Graham

GregS · Guest

In article <48ECC5D4.F34F431B@hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]

GregS wrote:

I think the Microsoft malicious software removal tool is a pain and does
nothing.

Would be par for the course. IIRC they bought it from another software company,
immediately disabled its 16 bit
capabilities that I>d have liked at the time for 98SE and then lost interest in
it.

For 'lost interest in' read normal Microsoft development cycle.

Graham
[/quote]

I still use 98SE at home, or W2K dual boot.

greg

Eeyore · Guest

GregS wrote:

[quote]I still use 98SE at home
[/quote]
Nought wrong with it FFS ! Good for you. I still have a 98SE box too.

Graham

JeffM · Guest

[quote]GregS wrote:
I think the Microsoft malicious software removal tool
is a pain and does nothing.

The day Micros~1 bought it, it was #1.[/quote]
..
Eeyore wrote:
[quote]Would be par for the course.
IIRC they bought it from another software company,

They bought the whole company, actually.[/quote]
http://www.google.com/search?q=GIANT.Company.Software+anti-spyware

[quote]immediately disabled its 16 bit capabilities

Yup. Can>t be supporting your own 4 year old OS. 8-|[/quote]

(alt.binaries.schematics.electronic removed from To: line)

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax · Guest

JeffM wrote:
[quote]Jim Thompson wrote:
I>m biting the bullet and removing Symantec/Norton Antivirus.
What>s the recommended replacement?

Paul Urbanus wrote:
I use ESET NOD32. Recommended by the IT guy
from a friends small (20 person) software company.[...]
www.eset.com

(alt.binaries.schematics.electronic removed from To: line)

It is also recommended by a guy whose opinion I value in these
matters.
In fact, they have become a sponsor of his
--and he is VERY discriminating about the sponsors he accepts
(though he recommended NOD32 before that financial link existed).
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:8MyGkWTD9MoJ:techguylabs.com/radio/ShowNotes/Show494+Leo.Laporte+ESET+NOD-32+site:TechGuyLabs.com
[/quote]
http://service1.symantec.com/Support/tsgeninfo.nsf/docid/2005033108162039

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.onetribe.me.uk/wordpress/?cat=5 - Our podcasts on weird stuff

Robert · Guest

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:st6le4p4emi22jp32v9sg5t9edllvk06fr@4ax.com:

[quote]
I>m biting the bullet and removing Symantec/Norton Antivirus.

What>s the recommended replacement?

...Jim Thompson
[/quote]
Kaspersky http://www.kaspersky.com/

Robert

Eeyore · Guest

Robert wrote:

[quote]Jim Thompson wrote
I>m biting the bullet and removing Symantec/Norton Antivirus.

What>s the recommended replacement?

Kaspersky http://www.kaspersky.com/
[/quote]
Russian isn>t it ? So that means they have advance knowledge of all the
newviruses.

Graham

Tom Biasi · Guest

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:vdone4p8ph1op66g9jv5lpcbbtmdd0sri4@4ax.com...
[quote]You mean:

news:g5one4pbu8ogcm3fergm0en2rk6kn0o1pt@4ax.com

?

JF
[/quote]
Back in the 70>s when I traveled a lot, I met a guy in LA at a computer
show. He had some neet stuff. His name was Peter Norton.

Tom

Robert · Guest

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:48ED4081.2BAE517E@hotmail.com:

[quote]

Robert wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote
I>m biting the bullet and removing Symantec/Norton Antivirus.

What>s the recommended replacement?

Kaspersky http://www.kaspersky.com/

Russian isn>t it ? So that means they have advance knowledge of all the
newviruses.

Graham

[/quote]
I would hope that they are less likely to do what some government
bureaucrat demands, but does not want to show probaboe cause for. The
German bureaucrats are trying to make use of malware. The Kaspersky
firewall is also good at letting me know when Micro$oft is being contacted.

I have a distrust of those who want unrestrained power.

Have a good day,
Robert

David Brown · Guest

Jim Thompson wrote:
[quote]I>m biting the bullet and removing Symantec/Norton Antivirus.

What>s the recommended replacement?

...Jim Thompson
[/quote]
First ask yourself *why* you think you need an antivirus program of any
sort, and then think if there are better ways to attack the root of the
problem. Rather than running your PC in a straight jacket re-checking
every file that is every opened, consider first if there are ways to
stop malware getting on to your PC in the first place.

Never use MS email software (OE or O), use IE as little as possible (and
lock it down to "high" security), make sure your incoming email is
scanned (preferably at your ISP, or your own email gateway) and all
executable attachments are removed, use a real firewall between your PC
and untrusted computers (that may well include other family members, not
just the Internet), check any dodgy downloads carefully, and most
importantly of all - use your head!

For on-demand scanning of downloads (and scanning of emails if your ISP
does not do it, or you don>t trust them), try clam (www.clamav.net,
www.clamwin.com).

On-demand virus scanners and complicated windows firewalls are an
amazing waste of time, money, and PC resources, and they are always
playing catch-up. A few proper precautions gives you better security
for nothing.

(Of course, you could always switch to Linux...)

TheM · Guest

"David Brown" <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote in message news:48f33dcc$0$25383$8404b019@news.wineasy.se...
[quote]
First ask yourself *why* you think you need an antivirus program of any sort, and then think if there are better ways to attack
the root of the problem. Rather than running your PC in a straight jacket re-checking every file that is every opened, consider
first if there are ways to stop malware getting on to your PC in the first place.
[/quote]
Agreed, been running without AV for years. I was sick of my Norton AV
and just uninstalled it at some point.

[quote]Never use MS email software (OE or O), use IE as little as possible (and lock it down to "high" security), make
[/quote]
I>ve been using OE for years without any problem. It is only a problem if you>re
an idiot and open attachments you don>t know (especially exe files).
No problem after years of use without AV. If attachment looks suspicious, I save
it and open in hex editor.

Firefox and enabled cookies here, no problems either.

[quote]sure your incoming email is scanned (preferably at your ISP, or your own email gateway) and all executable attachments are
removed, use a real firewall between your PC and untrusted computers (that may well include other family members, not just the
Internet), check any dodgy downloads carefully, and most importantly of all - use your head!
[/quote]
Nothing beats a "helpfull" ISP that blocks spam for you on their own initiative,
including 1% of "collateral damage". Preferably using ORBL or similar
unreliable database, which should be used only for consultation and not just
flatly blocking emails. And of course, if asked, they will claim to not perform
any kind of filtering. Comcast comes to mind.

But AV on the mail server is indeed nice to have.

[quote]For on-demand scanning of downloads (and scanning of emails if your ISP does not do it, or you don>t trust them), try clam
(www.clamav.net, www.clamwin.com).
[/quote]
Neat, per file scanning on demand, comes handy sometimes.

M

David Brown · Guest

TheM wrote:
[quote]"David Brown" <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote in message
news:48f33dcc$0$25383$8404b019@news.wineasy.se...
First ask yourself *why* you think you need an antivirus program of
any sort, and then think if there are better ways to attack the
root of the problem. Rather than running your PC in a straight
jacket re-checking every file that is every opened, consider first
if there are ways to stop malware getting on to your PC in the
first place.

Agreed, been running without AV for years. I was sick of my Norton AV
and just uninstalled it at some point.

Never use MS email software (OE or O), use IE as little as possible
(and lock it down to "high" security), make

I>ve been using OE for years without any problem. It is only a
problem if you>re an idiot and open attachments you don>t know
(especially exe files). No problem after years of use without AV. If
attachment looks suspicious, I save it and open in hex editor.

[/quote]
The problem is when malicious email coding tells OE to execute the
attachment (or other unpleasant code) automatically when you simply view
the email. Since OE6 this has been less of a problem, as the security
setting is "high" by default, but I simply would not trust OE (or
Outlook) - there have been too many instances of exploitable bugs and
major design flaws (such as ActiveX, and in particular the concept of
"ActiveX controls marked safe for scripting"). Even with "high"
security, you are open to web bugs (which tell potential attackers your
IP address and that you are online) and other such nasties.

And why would you bother looking at suspicious attachments in a hex
editor? I would think the "shift delete" treatment is more appropriate.

[quote]Firefox and enabled cookies here, no problems either.

[/quote]
The same here. At my office, IE is banned for all but a couple of
specific sites - people use Firefox or Opera (by personal preference).

[quote]sure your incoming email is scanned (preferably at your ISP, or
your own email gateway) and all executable attachments are removed,
use a real firewall between your PC and untrusted computers (that
may well include other family members, not just the Internet),
check any dodgy downloads carefully, and most importantly of all -
use your head!

Nothing beats a "helpfull" ISP that blocks spam for you on their own
initiative, including 1% of "collateral damage". Preferably using
ORBL or similar unreliable database, which should be used only for
consultation and not just flatly blocking emails. And of course, if
asked, they will claim to not perform any kind of filtering. Comcast
comes to mind.

But AV on the mail server is indeed nice to have.

For on-demand scanning of downloads (and scanning of emails if your
ISP does not do it, or you don>t trust them), try clam
(www.clamav.net, www.clamwin.com).

Neat, per file scanning on demand, comes handy sometimes.

[/quote]
I forgot to add one other important security setting - turn off the
"hide extension for known file types" setting in explorer. Then you
won>t fall for the old "joke.txt.exe" ploy.

TheM · Guest

"David Brown" <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote in message news:48f35de9$0$25383$8404b019@news.wineasy.se...
[quote]TheM wrote:
The problem is when malicious email coding tells OE to execute the attachment (or other unpleasant code) automatically when you
simply view the email. Since OE6 this has been less of a problem, as the security setting is "high" by default, but I simply
would not trust OE (or Outlook) - there have been too many instances of exploitable bugs and major design flaws (such as ActiveX,
and in particular the concept of "ActiveX controls marked safe for scripting"). Even with "high" security, you are open to web
bugs (which tell potential attackers your IP address and that you are online) and other such nasties.

And why would you bother looking at suspicious attachments in a hex editor? I would think the "shift delete" treatment is more
appropriate.
[/quote]
1-2 times I suspected what appeared to be a normal attachment so I checked
it out first just in case.

[quote]I forgot to add one other important security setting - turn off the "hide extension for known file types" setting in explorer.
Then you won>t fall for the old "joke.txt.exe" ploy.
[/quote]
There>s probably nobody in this NG that doesn>t do this first time after
installing a fresh copy of Windows. But yes, it happens.

M


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Electronics - Cad/CAM Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3