(Msg. 17) Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:29 am
Post subject: Re: F-Prot for Dos not scanning all files [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: alt>comp>virus (more info?)
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:40:16 -0400, kurt wismer <kurtw DeleteThis @sympatico.ca>
wrote:
>Art wrote:
>[snip]
>> Obviously! Learning whom to trust and whom not to is also sound. Hell,
>> if those of us offering free sw aren't to be trusted, we might as well
>> quit ... and that includes you!
>
>i don't know if you've heard but there are now quite a number of 'rogue'
>security apps out there these days
Guess you don't read my posts. I've sure talked about them often
enough.
.... offering free software on it's own
>isn't enough to prove trustworthiness...
Why is it people feel compelled to state the obvious?
>if he wants to get an impression of how trustworthy you are then he's
>going to have to google you...
Yep. That's my point. And lurk here awhile.
>you could get him started with a link to
>a google search...
Sure. But I didn't choose to do any spoon feeding.
>you might also disclose any professional/commercial
>affiliations you might have (if you have any) as an indicator that
>you're not some creep lurking in the shadows of the internet...
Someone might bring up such weak indicators if they are inclined
to. I wouldn't be inclined to.
For the record and at the risk of repeating what I've stated here in
the past, I'm a retired EE with no current professional or
commercial affiliations (other than that Kaspersky Affiliate
thing you see at my web site. I'm still waiting for the first
penny from that )
I assumed (wrongly so far) that several users and testers of my
past and current free utils and programs would speak up. That's
the strong and far more convincing indicator I hoped for.
(Msg. 18) Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:29 am
Post subject: Re: F-Prot for Dos not scanning all files [Login to view extended thread Info.] Imported from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
(Msg. 19) Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:29 am
Post subject: Re: F-Prot for Dos not scanning all files [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:29:44 GMT, Art <null.DeleteThis@zilch.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:40:16 -0400, kurt wismer <kurtw.DeleteThis@sympatico.ca>
>wrote:
>
>>Art wrote:
>>[snip]
>>> Obviously! Learning whom to trust and whom not to is also sound. Hell,
>>> if those of us offering free sw aren't to be trusted, we might as well
>>> quit ... and that includes you!
>>
>>i don't know if you've heard but there are now quite a number of 'rogue'
>>security apps out there these days
>
>Guess you don't read my posts. I've sure talked about them often
>enough.
>
>... offering free software on it's own
>>isn't enough to prove trustworthiness...
>
>Why is it people feel compelled to state the obvious?
>
>>if he wants to get an impression of how trustworthy you are then he's
>>going to have to google you...
>
>Yep. That's my point. And lurk here awhile.
>
>>you could get him started with a link to
>>a google search...
>
>Sure. But I didn't choose to do any spoon feeding.
>
>>you might also disclose any professional/commercial
>>affiliations you might have (if you have any) as an indicator that
>>you're not some creep lurking in the shadows of the internet...
>
>Someone might bring up such weak indicators if they are inclined
>to. I wouldn't be inclined to.
>
>For the record and at the risk of repeating what I've stated here in
>the past, I'm a retired EE with no current professional or
>commercial affiliations (other than that Kaspersky Affiliate
>thing you see at my web site. I'm still waiting for the first
>penny from that )
>
>I assumed (wrongly so far) that several users and testers of my
>past and current free utils and programs would speak up. That's
>the strong and far more convincing indicator I hoped for.
Hi Art,
I'll certainly "speak up" in your behalf. But I totally agree with the
OP and "his" reluctance to download and run software from a stranger.
I think its great that someone new to this group and unfamiliar with
its "regulars" would have a clue. Even if "he" "knew" you, its still
correct to question the activity for the benefit of other "newbies".
No?
IMO, you're both "right" so no problem with either stance or POV. The
dialogue should serve to promote understanding for all - no need argue
the obvious.
(Msg. 20) Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 12:04 pm
Post subject: Re: F-Prot for Dos not scanning all files [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
>> if he wants to get an impression of how trustworthy you are then he's
>> going to have to google you...
>
> Yep. That's my point. And lurk here awhile.
>
>> you could get him started with a link to
>> a google search...
>
> Sure. But I didn't choose to do any spoon feeding.
>
Me neither, Art. I was going to point him to Claymania.
>> you might also disclose any professional/commercial
>> affiliations you might have (if you have any) as an indicator that
>> you're not some creep lurking in the shadows of the internet...
>
> Someone might bring up such weak indicators if they are inclined
> to. I wouldn't be inclined to.
>
Hear, hear! Means nothing, does it. Except, perhaps, the willingness of
whoever it's aimed at to compromise the principles they otherwise seek to
uphold.
>
> I assumed (wrongly so far) that several users and testers of my
> past and current free utils and programs would speak up. That's
> the strong and far more convincing indicator I hoped for.
>
(Msg. 21) Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 12:04 pm
Post subject: Re: F-Prot for Dos not scanning all files [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:04:05 +0100, "Shane" <shanebeatson.RemoveThis@gmail.com>
wrote:
(Msg. 22) Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:08 pm
Post subject: Re: F-Prot for Dos not scanning all files [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:21:01 -0400, Clay
<one.step.closer.TakeThisOut@intentionally.invalid> wrote:
>Hi Art,
>I'll certainly "speak up" in your behalf. But I totally agree with the
>OP and "his" reluctance to download and run software from a stranger.
Sure. I suppose this seems so obvious to me that I didn't feel
compelled at all to say to the OP "Good you're practicing safe
hex" or something like that.
BTW, good to hear from a voice in the wilderness. Don't hear
anything at all from you any more. In fact, now that I think of it,
you never responded to a email I sent to you not too long ago.
(Msg. 23) Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:08 pm
Post subject: Re: F-Prot for Dos not scanning all files [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:08:13 GMT, Art <null.TakeThisOut@zilch.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:21:01 -0400, Clay
><one.step.closer.TakeThisOut@intentionally.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi Art,
>>I'll certainly "speak up" in your behalf. But I totally agree with the
>>OP and "his" reluctance to download and run software from a stranger.
>
>Sure. I suppose this seems so obvious to me that I didn't feel
>compelled at all to say to the OP "Good you're practicing safe
>hex" or something like that.
Honestly, I feel that anyone that is truly practicing safe hex
deserves a pat on the back (or equivalent). Many "say" they do, but
really don't always. I don't know, maybe it's because some like to
pick and choose their safe computing criteria/practices rather than
really being serious about it. Lack of education? Laziness? Apathy?
Whatever, it was good to see some proper paranoia.
>BTW, good to hear from a voice in the wilderness. Don't hear
Yeah, too busy to post mostly. Barely making time time to read acv
these days.
>anything at all from you any more. In fact, now that I think of it,
>you never responded to a email I sent to you not too long ago.
I got it. I thought it was just an "FYI" thing. Now I feel bad that I
didn't reply as usual. My bad. I do hope all is well with you and Peg.
(Msg. 24) Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:21 pm
Post subject: Re: F-Prot for Dos not scanning all files [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
On 12 Jun 2006 05:59:52 -0700, "Hugo Trebl" <singalong.TakeThisOut@dodgeit.com>
wrote:
>Art wrote:
>> On 10 Jun 2006 18:29:33 -0700, "Hugo Trebl" <singalong.TakeThisOut@dodgeit.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >I'm worried that it might miss something that is not obvious at first
>> >glance.
>> >I doubt that it can scan the new rar format without an engine update
>> >for example.
>>
>> I just downloaded a trial of the DOS version of Winrar. It's Version
>> 3.60 Beta 4. I compressed a RAR archive of files using it. KAVDOS32
>> had no problem scanning all the files "within" the RAR archive.
>
>I stand corrected.
No problem.
>As for the other thread, I did find another version of kavdos32 and
>compared the exe and dll, and it did not show any suspicious behaviour
>in vmware, so I'll have no choice but to trust you from now on
At least you managed to trigger some discussion on a truly difficult
problem .... that of what and whom to trust. Seems it's getting
worse all the time, what with all the rogue antispyware/adware
apps proliferating nowdays.
>I made a simple batch file for the %username%\sendTo folder for win
>2000/XP, in case anyone is interested:
>
>@echo off
>:LOOP
>for %%a in (%1) do c:\tools\kavdosnt\kavdos32 /* /a- /u- /MD- /MP- /b
>/p /m %%~fsa & pause
>SHIFT
>IF '%1' == '' GOTO END
>GOTO LOOP
>:END
All times are: Eastern Time (US & Canada) (change) Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4
Page 3 of 4
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Home
Forums
Home
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
)
Security