Guest 1PW Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 Cross-Posted MBAM version 1.34 was released today. Enjoy. Pete -- 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message news:gn072n$613$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:blue"> > > Cross-Posted > > MBAM version 1.34 was released today. > > Enjoy. > > Pete > -- > 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]</span> Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention, Pete. I am, though, just a little confused. You have said elsewhere that you "only have eyes for Linux" MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:- a.. Version: 1.34 a.. File Size: 2.74 MB a.. Operating Systems: Microsoft ® Windows 2000, XP, Vista (32-bit only). How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good thing to do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of 'nasties' from the machine of a user, how can that user be certain that it hasn't actually installed some badware too? As you don't use Windows, you would never know, would you? <smile> -- Dave Quote
Guest 1PW Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 On 02/12/2009 04:19 AM, ~BD~ sent:<span style="color:blue"> > "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message > news:gn072n$613$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:green"> >> Cross-Posted >> >> MBAM version 1.34 was released today. >> >> Enjoy. >> >> Pete >> -- >> 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]</span> > > > Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention, Pete. > > I am, though, just a little confused. You have said elsewhere that you "only > have eyes for Linux"</span> misquote... Minus twenty. <span style="color:blue"> > MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:-</span> Faulty logic? What did the educational YouTube video link, I sent you, show? Minus twenty-five. <span style="color:blue"> > a.. Version: 1.34 > a.. File Size: 2.74 MB > a.. Operating Systems: Microsoft ® Windows 2000, XP, Vista (32-bit only). > > How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good thing to > do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of 'nasties' from the > machine of a user, how can that user be certain that it hasn't actually > installed some badware too?</span> Fair question. But answered with a question: How would one know if information received in these newsgroups is legitimate? <span style="color:blue"> > As you don't use Windows, you would never know, would you? <smile></span> Is the above a faulty assumption? <frown> <span style="color:blue"> > -- > Dave</span> Hint: My last MBAM 1.34/1752 full scan time was about 42 minutes. ....and I use the paid version of MBAM. True statements. The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic? Pete -- 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 I don't like losing points! In-line responses:- "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message news:gn1aie$3s2$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:blue"> > On 02/12/2009 04:19 AM, ~BD~ sent:<span style="color:green"> >> "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message >> news:gn072n$613$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:darkred"> >>> Cross-Posted >>> >>> MBAM version 1.34 was released today. >>> >>> Enjoy. >>> >>> Pete >>> -- >>> 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]</span> >> >> >> Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention, Pete. >> >> I am, though, just a little confused. You have said elsewhere that you >> "only >> have eyes for Linux"</span> > > misquote... Minus twenty.</span> You are correct. <pout> You actually said "You have never read a word from me that didn't originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system". <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:-</span></span> <span style="color:blue"> > Faulty logic? What did the educational YouTube video link, I sent you, > show? Minus twenty-five.</span> Hmmm! Maybe - not sure about that. Perhaps you are running Windows within Linux - as a virtual machine. Surely, though, in such a case you'd never need to 'clean' Windows with Mbam -would you? <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> a.. Version: 1.34 >> a.. File Size: 2.74 MB >> a.. Operating Systems: Microsoft ® Windows 2000, XP, Vista (32-bit only). >> >> How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good thing >> to >> do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of 'nasties' from the >> machine of a user, how can that user be certain that it hasn't actually >> installed some badware too?</span> > > Fair question. But answered with a question:</span> That's not fair! <pout again> <span style="color:blue"> > How would one know if information received in these newsgroups is > legitimate?</span> There is absolutely NO way of knowing - unless the Spirit tells you/me. I'm led to believe that I can trust you - so there! <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> As you don't use Windows, you would never know, would you? <smile></span> > > Is the above a faulty assumption? <frown></span> It seems as if it might be a faulty assumption. <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> -- >> Dave</span> > > Hint: My last MBAM 1.34/1752 full scan time was about 42 minutes. > > ...and I use the paid version of MBAM. True statements.</span> I have no understanding of why anyone using Linux as their operating system would ever need to use MBAM - unless it was on a different personal Windows machine, the computer of a family member, a friend or even a client/customer <span style="color:blue"> > The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic?</span> Not really. Whilst I may be wrong and/or misguided from time to time - I'm still one of the good guys! HTH -- Dave Quote
Guest 1PW Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 OT: Re: MBAM 1.34 Released Today. On 02/12/2009 06:46 AM, ~BD~ sent:<span style="color:blue"> > I don't like losing points! In-line responses:-</span> You can always earn those points back. Snip, snip... <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> >>> I am, though, just a little confused. You have said elsewhere that you >>> "only >>> have eyes for Linux"</span> >> misquote... Minus twenty.</span> > > You are correct. <pout></span> Five points. <span style="color:blue"> > You actually said "You have never read a word from me that didn't > originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system".</span> True statement. Twenty points. New hint: I have never /sent/ a word to you that didn't originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system". <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:-</span></span> > <span style="color:green"> >> Faulty logic? What did the educational YouTube video link, I sent you, >> show? Minus twenty-five.</span> > > Hmmm! Maybe - not sure about that. Perhaps you are running Windows within > Linux - as a virtual machine. Surely, though, in such a case you'd never > need to 'clean' Windows with MBAM -would you?</span> Faulty logic. Hence, incorrect conclusion. Minus ten. <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> a.. Version: 1.34 >>> a.. File Size: 2.74 MB >>> a.. Operating Systems: Microsoft ® Windows 2000, XP, Vista (32-bit only). >>> >>> How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good thing >>> to >>> do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of 'nasties' from the >>> machine of a user, how can that user be certain that it hasn't actually >>> installed some badware too?</span> >> Fair question. But answered with a question:</span> > > That's not fair! <pout again> > > <span style="color:green"> >> How would one know if information received in these newsgroups is >> legitimate?</span> > > > There is absolutely NO way of knowing - unless the Spirit tells you/me. I'm > led to believe that I can trust you - so there!</span> Reputation. Minus twenty-five. ...so there^2 <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> As you don't use Windows, you would never know, would you? <smile></span> >> Is the above a faulty assumption? <frown></span> > > > It seems as if it might be a faulty assumption.</span> True statement. Twenty points. Twenty-five if you remove "might" and 'seems'. <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> -- >>> Dave</span> >> Hint: My last MBAM 1.34/1752 full scan time was about 42 minutes. >> >> ...and I use the paid version of MBAM. True statements.</span> > > > I have no understanding of why anyone using Linux as their operating system > would ever need to use MBAM - unless it was on a different personal Windows > machine, the computer of a family member, a friend or even a client/customer</span> You have now seen that a virtualized guest OS is possible. Does that guest OS require the same antimalware protections as a standalone system? Twenty-five points. <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic?</span> > > > Not really. Whilst I may be wrong and/or misguided from time to time - I'm > still one of the good guys!</span> Your goodness was not called into question. No points or minus thirty. Your call. <span style="color:blue"> > HTH > -- > Dave</span> Use your deductive reasoning Watson (Dave)! Resume fishing again Dave. -- 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] Quote
Guest FromTheRafters Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message news:gn1aie$3s2$1@news.motzarella.org... <span style="color:blue"> > The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic?</span> Another puzzle for Dave? No note passing this time, I promise. Quote
Guest 1PW Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 OT: Re: MBAM 1.34 Released Today. On 02/12/2009 09:54 AM, FromTheRafters sent:<span style="color:blue"> > "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message > news:gn1aie$3s2$1@news.motzarella.org... > <span style="color:green"> >> The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic?</span> > > Another puzzle for Dave? No note passing this time, I promise.</span> If I catch the two of you passing notes again, both of you will be sent home with a note. :-) Top of the morning to you FTR... Pete -- 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 Re: Re: MBAM 1.34 Released Today. Top of the morning? It's nearly my bed time! style_emoticons/ Dave -- "1PW" <barcrna hgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message news:gn1u5t$dv9$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:blue"> > On 02/12/2009 09:54 AM, FromTheRafters sent:<span style="color:green"> >> "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message >> news:gn1aie$3s2$1@news.motzarella.org... >><span style="color:darkred"> >>> The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic?</span> >> >> Another puzzle for Dave? No note passing this time, I promise.</span> > > If I catch the two of you passing notes again, both of you will be sent > home with a note. :-) > > Top of the morning to you FTR... > > Pete > -- > 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] </span> Quote
Guest db ´¯`·.. > Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 Re: SPAM just because it is a popular program/freeware doesn't mean that this thread is not spam. ------------------------------ in any case you guys should read between the lines when it comes to freeware: http://www.malwarebytes.org/privacy.php Malwarebytes may also collect certain information about your computer to facilitate and evaluate your use of the Site and the Products and Services. For example, we may log environmental variables, such as browser type, operating system, CPU speed, referring or exit webpages, and the Internet Protocol (IP) address of your computer. Malwarebytes also uses such information to measure traffic patterns on the Site and usage of the Products and Services. We do not match such information with any other information held by Malwarebytes unless we have your consent. --------------------- legally, the above term "may" implies "will" information collected is not limited to the above and "without your consent" has no value legal standing because as it would require user to have knowledge and oversight of such activities. ------------------------- also, all the fixes they have made leads one to wonder what all was or was not done with the previous versions. how many systems could have become corrupted as a result. -------------------------- freeware costs money to make and provide. so users who utilize freeware should not be whining that they are also using information aggregators as well, i.e.. subtle spyware. ------------------ my suggestion is to simply scan for malware periodically with a genuine program: http://www.microsoft.com/security/malwareremove/default.mspx -- db·´¯`·...¸><)))º> DatabaseBen, Retired Professional - Systems Analyst - Database Developer - Accountancy - Veteran of the Armed Forces "share the nirvana" - dbZen ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<span style="color:blue"> > ></span> "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message news:gn072n$613$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:blue"> > > Cross-Posted > > MBAM version 1.34 was released today. > > Enjoy. > > Pete > -- > 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] </span> Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 Re: Re: MBAM 1.34 Released Today. "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message news:gn1k2i$g1f$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:blue"> > On 02/12/2009 06:46 AM, ~BD~ sent:<span style="color:green"> >> I don't like losing points! In-line responses:-</span> > > You can always earn those points back. > > Snip, snip... ><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>> >>>> I am, though, just a little confused. You have said elsewhere that you >>>> "only >>>> have eyes for Linux" >>> misquote... Minus twenty.</span> >> >> You are correct. <pout></span> > > Five points.</span> That's a start! <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> You actually said "You have never read a word from me that didn't >> originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system".</span> > > True statement. Twenty points.</span> Much better! <span style="color:blue"> > New hint: I have never /sent/ a word to you that didn't > originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system".</span> Perhaps you refer to the single email which you sent to me? <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>> MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:-</span> >><span style="color:darkred"> >>> Faulty logic? What did the educational YouTube video link, I sent you, >>> show? Minus twenty-five.</span> >> >> Hmmm! Maybe - not sure about that. Perhaps you are running Windows >> within >> Linux - as a virtual machine. Surely, though, in such a case you'd never >> need to 'clean' Windows with MBAM -would you?</span> > > Faulty logic. Hence, incorrect conclusion. Minus ten.</span> Not good! An answer to my query may have helped. <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>> a.. Version: 1.34 >>>> a.. File Size: 2.74 MB >>>> a.. Operating Systems: Microsoft ® Windows 2000, XP, Vista (32-bit >>>> only). >>>> >>>> How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good >>>> thing >>>> to >>>> do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of 'nasties' from >>>> the >>>> machine of a user, how can that user be certain that it hasn't actually >>>> installed some badware too? >>> Fair question. But answered with a question:</span> >> >> That's not fair! <pout again> >> >><span style="color:darkred"> >>> How would one know if information received in these newsgroups is >>> legitimate?</span> >> >> >> There is absolutely NO way of knowing - unless the Spirit tells you/me. >> I'm >> led to believe that I can trust you - so there!</span> > > Reputation. Minus twenty-five. ...so there^2</span> You drive a hard bargain, Sir! <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>> As you don't use Windows, you would never know, would you? <smile> >>> Is the above a faulty assumption? <frown></span> >> >> >> It seems as if it might be a faulty assumption.</span> > > True statement. Twenty points. Twenty-five if you remove "might" and > 'seems'.</span> Nothing is ever quite as it seems! <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>> -- >>>> Dave >>> Hint: My last MBAM 1.34/1752 full scan time was about 42 minutes. >>> >>> ...and I use the paid version of MBAM. True statements.</span> >> >> >> I have no understanding of why anyone using Linux as their operating >> system >> would ever need to use MBAM - unless it was on a different personal >> Windows >> machine, the computer of a family member, a friend or even a >> client/customer</span> > > You have now seen that a virtualized guest OS is possible. Does that > guest OS require the same antimalware protections as a standalone > system? Twenty-five points.</span> NO! <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic?</span> >> >> >> Not really. Whilst I may be wrong and/or misguided from time to time - >> I'm >> still one of the good guys!</span> > > Your goodness was not called into question. No points or minus thirty. > Your call.</span> I have a guardian angel, of that I have no doubt. I do not lie or steal - nor do I seek to kill my fellow human beings. There are some using the 'net who do - but I am not one of them! <span style="color:blue"> > > Use your deductive reasoning Watson (Dave)! Resume fishing again Dave. > > -- > 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]</span> Go here and type in "~" without the quotes http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?act=members I've been fishing for a long time! style_emoticons/ Dave -- Quote
Guest 1PW Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 OT: Re: MBAM 1.34 Released Today. On 02/12/2009 03:19 PM, ~BD~ sent:<span style="color:blue"> > "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message > news:gn1k2i$g1f$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:green"> >> On 02/12/2009 06:46 AM, ~BD~ sent:<span style="color:darkred"> >>> I don't like losing points! In-line responses:-</span> >> You can always earn those points back. >> >> Snip, snip... >><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>> I am, though, just a little confused. You have said elsewhere that you >>>>> "only >>>>> have eyes for Linux" >>>> misquote... Minus twenty. >>> You are correct. <pout></span> >> Five points.</span> > > > That's a start! > > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> You actually said "You have never read a word from me that didn't >>> originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system".</span> >> True statement. Twenty points.</span> > > > Much better! > > <span style="color:green"> >> New hint: I have never /sent/ a word to you that didn't >> originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system".</span> > > > Perhaps you refer to the single email which you sent to me?</span> No. Think more globally. <span style="color:blue"> > > > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>> MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:- >>>> Faulty logic? What did the educational YouTube video link, I sent you, >>>> show? Minus twenty-five. >>> Hmmm! Maybe - not sure about that. Perhaps you are running Windows >>> within >>> Linux - as a virtual machine. Surely, though, in such a case you'd never >>> need to 'clean' Windows with MBAM -would you?</span> >> Faulty logic. Hence, incorrect conclusion. Minus ten.</span> > > > Not good! An answer to my query may have helped.</span> Read on. <span style="color:blue"> > > > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>> a.. Version: 1.34 >>>>> a.. File Size: 2.74 MB >>>>> a.. Operating Systems: Microsoft ® Windows 2000, XP, Vista (32-bit >>>>> only). >>>>> >>>>> How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good >>>>> thing >>>>> to >>>>> do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of 'nasties' from >>>>> the >>>>> machine of a user, how can that user be certain that it hasn't actually >>>>> installed some badware too? >>>> Fair question. But answered with a question: >>> That's not fair! <pout again> >>> >>> >>>> How would one know if information received in these newsgroups is >>>> legitimate? >>> >>> There is absolutely NO way of knowing - unless the Spirit tells you/me. >>> I'm >>> led to believe that I can trust you - so there!</span> >> Reputation. Minus twenty-five. ...so there^2</span> > > > You drive a hard bargain, Sir!</span> MBAM has earned an excellent reputation. Unless proven otherwise, it doesn't install badware. <span style="color:blue"> > > > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>> As you don't use Windows, you would never know, would you? <smile> >>>> Is the above a faulty assumption? <frown> >>> >>> It seems as if it might be a faulty assumption.</span> >> True statement. Twenty points. Twenty-five if you remove "might" and >> 'seems'.</span> > > > Nothing is ever quite as it seems!</span> Perhaps. Hint: I just updated my MBAM's database to 1756. <span style="color:blue"> > > > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dave >>>> Hint: My last MBAM 1.34/1752 full scan time was about 42 minutes. >>>> >>>> ...and I use the paid version of MBAM. True statements. >>> >>> I have no understanding of why anyone using Linux as their operating >>> system >>> would ever need to use MBAM - unless it was on a different personal >>> Windows >>> machine, the computer of a family member, a friend or even a >>> client/customer</span> >> You have now seen that a virtualized guest OS is possible. Does that >> guest OS require the same antimalware protections as a standalone >> system? Twenty-five points.</span> > > > NO!</span> Hint: It's the opposite of no. :-) <span style="color:blue"> > > > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>> The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic? >>> >>> Not really. Whilst I may be wrong and/or misguided from time to time - >>> I'm >>> still one of the good guys!</span> >> Your goodness was not called into question. No points or minus thirty. >> Your call.</span> > > > I have a guardian angel, of that I have no doubt. > > I do not lie or steal - nor do I seek to kill my fellow human beings. There > are some using the 'net who do - but I am not one of them!</span> OK. This was accepted much earlier. <span style="color:blue"> > > <span style="color:green"> >> Use your deductive reasoning Watson (Dave)! Resume fishing again Dave. >> >> -- >> 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]</span> > > > Go here and type in "~" without the quotes > http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?act=members > > I've been fishing for a long time! style_emoticons/ > > Dave</span> I have more than one computer Dave... -- 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 Re: Re: MBAM 1.34 Released Today. I'm struggling now! style_emoticons/ "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message news:gn2dla$u83$1@news.motzarella.org... Snip <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >><span style="color:darkred"> >>> New hint: I have never /sent/ a word to you that didn't >>> originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system".</span> >> >> >> Perhaps you refer to the single email which you sent to me?</span> > > No. Think more globally.</span> You've lost me. Will you explain, please? <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>>> MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:- >>>>> Faulty logic? What did the educational YouTube video link, I sent >>>>> you, >>>>> show? Minus twenty-five. >>>> Hmmm! Maybe - not sure about that. Perhaps you are running Windows >>>> within >>>> Linux - as a virtual machine. Surely, though, in such a case you'd >>>> never >>>> need to 'clean' Windows with MBAM -would you? >>> Faulty logic. Hence, incorrect conclusion. Minus ten.</span> >> >> >> Not good! An answer to my query may have helped.</span> > > Read on. ></span> I did read on but am still no wiser. Sorry. <snip><span style="color:blue"> > > MBAM has earned an excellent reputation. Unless proven otherwise, it > doesn't install badware. ></span> That's good to know! Maybe you have inside information. I have not, actually, said that it did. I just felt it important that others recognise that loading any programme /might/ do bad things as well as good. In the fora I have visited 'helpers' give instructions which are blindly followed. <snip> <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> Nothing is ever quite as it seems!</span> > > Perhaps. Hint: I just updated my MBAM's database to 1756. ></span> Time to update, Pete! My scan result:- Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware 1.34 Database version: 1757 Windows 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 13/02/2009 09:03:00 mbam-log-2009-02-13 (09-03-00).txt Scan type: Full Scan (C:\|D:\|) Objects scanned: 153212 Time elapsed: 44 minute(s), 33 second(s) Memory Processes Infected: 0 Memory Modules Infected: 0 Registry Keys Infected: 0 Registry Values Infected: 0 Registry Data Items Infected: 0 Folders Infected: 0 Files Infected: 0 Memory Processes Infected: (No malicious items detected) Memory Modules Infected: (No malicious items detected) Registry Keys Infected: (No malicious items detected) Registry Values Infected: (No malicious items detected) Registry Data Items Infected: (No malicious items detected) Folders Infected: (No malicious items detected) Files Infected: (No malicious items detected) <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> Does that guest OS require the same antimalware protections as a >>> standalone system? Twenty-five points.</span> >> >> NO!</span> > > Hint: It's the opposite of no. :-) ></span> I have no experience of running another OS within Linux. I had a notion that it would be a bit like the Google Chrome browser - where after a session using the 'trial' OS it would simply be discarded totally and a 'fresh' version used on the next occasion. I now suspect that it's not like that at all! <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>> The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic? >>>> >>>> Not really. Whilst I may be wrong and/or misguided from time to time - >>>> I'm >>>> still one of the good guys! >>> Your goodness was not called into question. No points or minus thirty. >>> Your call.</span> >> >> >> I have a guardian angel, of that I have no doubt. >> >> I do not lie or steal - nor do I seek to kill my fellow human beings. >> There >> are some using the 'net who do - but I am not one of them!</span> > > OK. This was accepted much earlier. ></span> Thank you! style_emoticons/ <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> Use your deductive reasoning Watson (Dave)! Resume fishing again >>> Dave. >>> >>> -- >>> 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]</span> >> >> >> Go here and type in "~" without the quotes >> http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?act=members >> >> I've been fishing for a long time! style_emoticons/ >> >> Dave</span> ></span> Did you go there and note that I am an Honorary Member? I see no sign of you there, yet you have paid your fee. I'm sure you could help many on the forum there. Maybe you are registered with a different user name? If you are, you can PM me there (~BD~) <span style="color:blue"> > I have more than one computer Dave...</span> I have thought about that but cannot tie up the ends. Help needed to conclude this! <s> Dave -- Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 Re: Re: MBAM 1.34 Released Today. I'm struggling now! style_emoticons/ "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message news:gn2dla$u83$1@news.motzarella.org... Snip <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >><span style="color:darkred"> >>> New hint: I have never /sent/ a word to you that didn't >>> originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system".</span> >> >> >> Perhaps you refer to the single email which you sent to me?</span> > > No. Think more globally.</span> You've lost me. Will you explain, please? <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>>> MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:- >>>>> Faulty logic? What did the educational YouTube video link, I sent >>>>> you, >>>>> show? Minus twenty-five. >>>> Hmmm! Maybe - not sure about that. Perhaps you are running Windows >>>> within >>>> Linux - as a virtual machine. Surely, though, in such a case you'd >>>> never >>>> need to 'clean' Windows with MBAM -would you? >>> Faulty logic. Hence, incorrect conclusion. Minus ten.</span> >> >> >> Not good! An answer to my query may have helped.</span> > > Read on. ></span> I did read on but am still no wiser. Sorry. <snip><span style="color:blue"> > > MBAM has earned an excellent reputation. Unless proven otherwise, it > doesn't install badware. ></span> That's good to know! Maybe you have inside information. I have not, actually, said that it did. I just felt it important that others recognise that loading any programme /might/ do bad things as well as good. In the fora I have visited 'helpers' give instructions which are blindly followed. <snip> <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> Nothing is ever quite as it seems!</span> > > Perhaps. Hint: I just updated my MBAM's database to 1756. ></span> Time to update, Pete! My scan result:- Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware 1.34 Database version: 1757 Windows 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 13/02/2009 09:03:00 mbam-log-2009-02-13 (09-03-00).txt Scan type: Full Scan (C:\|D:\|) Objects scanned: 153212 Time elapsed: 44 minute(s), 33 second(s) Memory Processes Infected: 0 Memory Modules Infected: 0 Registry Keys Infected: 0 Registry Values Infected: 0 Registry Data Items Infected: 0 Folders Infected: 0 Files Infected: 0 Memory Processes Infected: (No malicious items detected) Memory Modules Infected: (No malicious items detected) Registry Keys Infected: (No malicious items detected) Registry Values Infected: (No malicious items detected) Registry Data Items Infected: (No malicious items detected) Folders Infected: (No malicious items detected) Files Infected: (No malicious items detected) <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> Does that guest OS require the same antimalware protections as a >>> standalone system? Twenty-five points.</span> >> >> NO!</span> > > Hint: It's the opposite of no. :-) ></span> I have no experience of running another OS within Linux. I had a notion that it would be a bit like the Google Chrome browser - where after a session using the 'trial' OS it would simply be discarded totally and a 'fresh' version used on the next occasion. I now suspect that it's not like that at all! <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>> The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic? >>>> >>>> Not really. Whilst I may be wrong and/or misguided from time to time - >>>> I'm >>>> still one of the good guys! >>> Your goodness was not called into question. No points or minus thirty. >>> Your call.</span> >> >> >> I have a guardian angel, of that I have no doubt. >> >> I do not lie or steal - nor do I seek to kill my fellow human beings. >> There >> are some using the 'net who do - but I am not one of them!</span> > > OK. This was accepted much earlier. ></span> Thank you! style_emoticons/ <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> Use your deductive reasoning Watson (Dave)! Resume fishing again >>> Dave. >>> >>> -- >>> 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]</span> >> >> >> Go here and type in "~" without the quotes >> http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?act=members >> >> I've been fishing for a long time! style_emoticons/ >> >> Dave</span> ></span> Did you go there and note that I am an Honorary Member? I see no sign of you there, yet you have paid your fee. I'm sure you could help many on the forum there. Maybe you are registered with a different user name? If you are, you can PM me there (~BD~) <span style="color:blue"> > I have more than one computer Dave...</span> I have thought about that but cannot tie up the ends. Help needed to conclude this! <s> Dave -- Quote
Guest 1PW Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 OT: Re: MBAM 1.34 Released Today. On 02/13/2009 01:35 AM, ~BD~ sent:<span style="color:blue"> > I'm struggling now! style_emoticons/</span> Sometimes that's what it takes to stretch your mind. <span style="color:blue"> > > "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message > news:gn2dla$u83$1@news.motzarella.org... > Snip > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>> New hint: I have never /sent/ a word to you that didn't >>>> originate from within a Linus Torvalds inspired system". >>> >>> Perhaps you refer to the single email which you sent to me?</span> >> No. Think more globally.</span> > > You've lost me. Will you explain, please?</span> Read on. <span style="color:blue"> > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>>>> MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:- >>>>>> Faulty logic? What did the educational YouTube video link, I sent >>>>>> you, >>>>>> show? Minus twenty-five. >>>>> Hmmm! Maybe - not sure about that. Perhaps you are running Windows >>>>> within >>>>> Linux - as a virtual machine. Surely, though, in such a case you'd >>>>> never >>>>> need to 'clean' Windows with MBAM -would you? >>>> Faulty logic. Hence, incorrect conclusion. Minus ten. >>> >>> Not good! An answer to my query may have helped.</span> >> Read on. >></span> > > > I did read on but am still no wiser. Sorry. > > > <snip><span style="color:green"> >> MBAM has earned an excellent reputation. Unless proven otherwise, it >> doesn't install badware. >></span> > > That's good to know! Maybe you have inside information.</span> The best reputations are not built that way. <span style="color:blue"> > > I have not, actually, said that it did. I just felt it important that others > recognise that loading any programme /might/ do bad things as well as > good. In the fora I have visited 'helpers' give instructions which are > blindly followed. > > > <snip> > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> Nothing is ever quite as it seems!</span> >> Perhaps. Hint: I just updated my MBAM's database to 1756. >></span> > > Time to update, Pete!</span> On my systems, it's done automatically. Same with my scans. <span style="color:blue"> > > My scan result:- > > Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware 1.34 > Database version: 1757 > Windows 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 > > 13/02/2009 09:03:00 > mbam-log-2009-02-13 (09-03-00).txt > > Scan type: Full Scan (C:|D:|) > Objects scanned: 153212 > Time elapsed: 44 minute(s), 33 second(s) > > Memory Processes Infected: 0 > Memory Modules Infected: 0 > Registry Keys Infected: 0 > Registry Values Infected: 0 > Registry Data Items Infected: 0 > Folders Infected: 0 > Files Infected: 0 > > Memory Processes Infected: > (No malicious items detected) > > Memory Modules Infected: > (No malicious items detected) > > Registry Keys Infected: > (No malicious items detected) > > Registry Values Infected: > (No malicious items detected) > > Registry Data Items Infected: > (No malicious items detected) > > Folders Infected: > (No malicious items detected) > > Files Infected: > (No malicious items detected)</span> Do you follow with SAS? AV? <span style="color:blue"> > > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>> Does that guest OS require the same antimalware protections as a >>>> standalone system? Twenty-five points. >>> NO!</span> >> Hint: It's the opposite of no. :-) >></span> > > I have no experience of running another OS within Linux. I had a notion that > it would be a bit like the Google Chrome browser - where after a session > using the 'trial' OS it would simply be discarded totally and a 'fresh' > version used on the next occasion. > > I now suspect that it's not like that at all!</span> You are now correct sir. <span style="color:blue"> > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>>>> The plot thickens Dave. Is it time to re-examine your logic? >>>>> Not really. Whilst I may be wrong and/or misguided from time to time - >>>>> I'm >>>>> still one of the good guys! >>>> Your goodness was not called into question. No points or minus thirty. >>>> Your call. >>> >>> I have a guardian angel, of that I have no doubt. >>> >>> I do not lie or steal - nor do I seek to kill my fellow human beings. >>> There >>> are some using the 'net who do - but I am not one of them!</span> >> OK. This was accepted much earlier. >></span> > > Thank you! style_emoticons/ > > <span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>>> Use your deductive reasoning Watson (Dave)! Resume fishing again >>>> Dave. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] >>> >>> Go here and type in "~" without the quotes >>> http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?act=members >>> >>> I've been fishing for a long time! style_emoticons/ >>> >>> Dave</span></span> > > Did you go there and note that I am an Honorary Member? I see no sign of you > there, yet you have paid your fee. I'm sure you could help many on the forum > there. Maybe you are registered with a different user name? If you are, you > can PM me there (~BD~)</span> I did see your entry. However, many folks are still unaware of MBAM. It's a given that someone with an infested Windows system is infinitely more likely to read about MBAM in /these/ newsgroups we frequent, as opposed to Malwarebyte's forum. <span style="color:blue"> > <span style="color:green"> >> I have more than one computer Dave...</span> > > I have thought about that but cannot tie up the ends. Help needed to > conclude this! <s> > > Dave</span> I have multiple computers. Some are dual boot. I can be on XP Pro^2, Vista Home Premium, Red Hat Enterprise, Fedora 10 and W98SE. I only allow my router to usually see two physical computers at one time. Infrequently a third wirelessly. My RHEL system is home. When sufficiently motivated, I'd like to virtualize a Fedora 10 with an XP Pro guest. However, my hardware's CPU probably will not agree to that. I may paravirtualize but things might be too slow then. Hence I use MBAM where required, and will use it on an XP Pro guest of a Fedora 10 host. All manner of antimalware protection should be afforded a virtualized Windows guest - just as if it were standalone. All mysteries have now been solved Watson. Prof. James Moriarty has finally been dealt with... Please resume teaching others to fish. Pete -- 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 14, 2009 Posted February 14, 2009 Re: Re: MBAM 1.34 Released Today. "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message news:gn3jhc$40a$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> >> >> <snip></span> > > Do you follow with SAS? AV?</span> <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> I have no experience of running another OS within Linux. I had a notion >> that >> it would be a bit like the Google Chrome browser - where after a session >> using the 'trial' OS it would simply be discarded totally and a 'fresh' >> version used on the next occasion. >> >> I now suspect that it's not like that at all!</span> > > You are now correct sir.</span> Tell me, Pete. What is the advantage of running a Windows OS as a guest on a Linux system? From what you have said/implied one has to use exactly the same care to prevent infection as one would in a stand-alone system. <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> >> Did you go there and note that I am an Honorary Member? I see no sign of >> you >> there, yet you have paid your fee. I'm sure you could help many on the >> forum >> there. Maybe you are registered with a different user name? If you are, >> you >> can PM me there (~BD~)</span> > > I did see your entry.</span> I sometimes pretend to be a fool - it does not necessarily follow that my brain has ceased to function! style_emoticons/ <span style="color:blue"> > However, many folks are still unaware of MBAM. It's a given that > someone with an infested Windows system is infinitely more likely to > read about MBAM in /these/ newsgroups we frequent, as opposed to > Malwarebyte's forum.</span> I agree completely. <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> I have more than one computer Dave...</span></span></span> Me too! <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> I have thought about that but cannot tie up the ends. Help needed to >> conclude this! <s> >> >> Dave</span> > > I have multiple computers. Some are dual boot. I can be on XP Pro^2, > Vista Home Premium, Red Hat Enterprise, Fedora 10 and W98SE. I only > allow my router to usually see two physical computers at one time. > Infrequently a third wirelessly. My RHEL system is home. When > sufficiently motivated, I'd like to virtualize a Fedora 10 with an XP > Pro guest. However, my hardware's CPU probably will not agree to that. > I may paravirtualize but things might be too slow then. > > Hence I use MBAM where required, and will use it on an XP Pro guest of a > Fedora 10 host. All manner of antimalware protection should be afforded > a virtualized Windows guest - just as if it were standalone.</span> I posed my main question above, Pete. I had a brief look here http://www.redhat.gl/rhel/ but I am really well outside my comfort zone with this! style_emoticons/ May I ask what on earth you actually do with all this technology? Is it just for fun or is it for some business purpose? <span style="color:blue"> > All mysteries have now been solved Watson. Prof. James Moriarty has > finally been dealt with... Please resume teaching others to fish.</span> I'll do just that, Mr Holmes. -- Dave Quote
Guest Dustin Cook Posted February 16, 2009 Posted February 16, 2009 "~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in news:upS4lwQjJHA.6124@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl: <span style="color:blue"> > "1PW" <barcrnahgjuvfgyr@nby.pbz> wrote in message > news:gn072n$613$1@news.motzarella.org...<span style="color:green"> >> >> Cross-Posted >> >> MBAM version 1.34 was released today. >> >> Enjoy. >> >> Pete >> -- >> 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]</span> > > > Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention, Pete. > > I am, though, just a little confused. You have said elsewhere that you > "only have eyes for Linux" > > MBAM and Linux do not mix, viz:- > > a.. Version: 1.34 > a.. File Size: 2.74 MB > a.. Operating Systems: Microsoft ® Windows 2000, XP, Vista (32-bit > only). > > How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good > thing to do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of > 'nasties' from the machine of a user, how can that user be certain > that it hasn't actually installed some badware too?</span> Just one question.... Are you high? -- Regards, Dustin Cook Malware Researcher MalwareBytes - http://www.malwarebytes.org Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message news:Xns9BB498BACBEC3HHI2948AJD832@69.16.185.250...<span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> >> How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good >> thing to do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of >> 'nasties' from the machine of a user, how can that user be certain >> that it hasn't actually installed some badware too?</span></span> <span style="color:blue"> > Just one question.... Are you high?</span> <span style="color:blue"> > -- > Regards, > Dustin Cook > Malware Researcher > MalwareBytes - http://www.malwarebytes.org ></span> No, Sir! Still naive? Probably! Correct me where I am wrong, please. My understanding is that 'malware' can be, and is, installed surrepticiously upon millions of computers around the world. Often, a user is unaware that a machine has been compromised. There are many 'help' forums available on the Internet. It seems only logical that some such operations may take advantage of inexperienced folk who do, without a second thought, download all manner of executable programmes onto their machines (as instructed by a 'helper'). Once a machine has been declared 'clean' - how can the average user possibly know that something 'nastie' has not been added to their machine if it appears to operate 'normally'? This couldn't/wouldn't happen? Are you sure? -- Dave Quote
Guest 1PW Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 On 02/17/2009 12:47 AM, ~BD~ sent:<span style="color:blue"> > "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:Xns9BB498BACBEC3HHI2948AJD832@69.16.185.250...<span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good >>> thing to do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of >>> 'nasties' from the machine of a user, how can that user be certain >>> that it hasn't actually installed some badware too?</span></span> > <span style="color:green"> >> Just one question.... Are you high?</span> > <span style="color:green"> >> -- >> Regards, >> Dustin Cook >> Malware Researcher >> MalwareBytes - http://www.malwarebytes.org >></span> > > > No, Sir! > > Still naive? Probably!</span> Paranoid? <span style="color:blue"> > Correct me where I am wrong, please. > > My understanding is that 'malware' can be, and is, installed surreptitiously > upon millions of computers around the world. Often, a user is unaware that a > machine has been compromised.</span> Almost a bit like Conficker, huh? Reads like good, safe computing and realtime antimalware applications are needed Dave. <span style="color:blue"> > There are many 'help' forums available on the Internet. It seems only > logical that some such operations may take advantage of inexperienced folk > who do, without a second thought, download all manner of executable > programmes onto their machines (as instructed by a 'helper').</span> Reputation leads to trust. If David Lipman suggested an MBAM scan for a particular infection you described in /your/ computer, what would you do? <span style="color:blue"> > Once a machine has been declared 'clean' - how can the average user possibly > know that something 'nastie' has not been added to their machine if it > appears to operate 'normally'?</span> Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS), realtime antimalware scans, or flatten, rebuild, restore from backups. <span style="color:blue"> > This couldn't/wouldn't happen? Are you sure?</span> You already know that answer. <span style="color:blue"> > -- > Dave </span> Trust must start somewhere and some paranoia is useful. MBAM has our trust through its reputation Dave. A bogus MBAM /could/ be downloaded from a disreputable source of course. But by only downloading from MalwareBytes.com, it comes as close to 100% trust as is possible. Some software authors will provide md5/sha1 hashes or PGP/GPG signed files that accompany the download and this is welcomed by some, but some reluctance on the part of authors and users is making that level of verification difficult. How then do we implement: trust but verify? If one is paralyzed by so much suspicion and doubt, then it's probably best to leave your computer turned off or only surf the net and do email through LiveCDs. What will you do now Dave? Pete -- 1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t] Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 Before I answer you in this thread, Pete, I'd like you to contact me again by email ........... and this time grant permission for me to respond to you in like manner. I respected your wishes previously - if you really are one of the good guys, please respond to this request. Thank you. style_emoticons/ -- Dave Quote
Guest Max Wachtel Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 ~BD~, after much thought, came up with this jewel:<span style="color:blue"> > Before I answer you in this thread, Pete, I'd like you to contact me again > by email ........... and this time grant permission for me to respond to > you in like manner. I respected your wishes previously - if you really are > one of the good guys, please respond to this request. Thank you. style_emoticons/ ></span> You still haven't figured out who the good guys are yet? I'm not sure if there is any hope for you...... -- Virus Removal http://max.shplink.com/removal.html Keep Clean http://max.shplink.com/keepingclean.html Change nomail.afraid.org to gmail.com to reply by email. nomail.afraid.org is specifically setup for use in USENET Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 "Max Wachtel" <maxwachtel@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message news:gnejt7$7hl$1@reader.motzarella.org...<span style="color:blue"> > ~BD~, after much thought, came up with this jewel:<span style="color:green"> >> Before I answer you in this thread, Pete, I'd like you to contact me >> again by email ........... and this time grant permission for me to >> respond to you in like manner. I respected your wishes previously - if >> you really are one of the good guys, please respond to this request. >> Thank you. style_emoticons/ >></span> > You still haven't figured out who the good guys are yet? > I'm not sure if there is any hope for you...... > -- > Virus Removal http://max.shplink.com/removal.html > Keep Clean http://max.shplink.com/keepingclean.html > Change nomail.afraid.org to gmail.com to reply by email. > nomail.afraid.org is specifically setup for use in USENET</span> When I first came to the groups I believed everyone . In the case of the Microsoft groups I naively thought everything was being moderated and checked by Microsoft itself. Doh! I'd been led to believe that any 'bad' posts would be scorned by 'the good guys' - just like folk gang-up on The Real Truth MVP (PCButts1). One of those supposedly 'good guys' was/is Robear Dyer (PA Bear) but he has lied - he's told everyone 'here' who cares to read that I (~BD~, BoaterDave, Beady, Imbeady2 and John_D) have been banned/sacked by a number of ISP's. That is one simple fact which I KNOW, categorically, is a lie. It simply isn't true. Or maybe it wasn't really him posting at all - it could have been an imposter, couldn't it? style_emoticons/ -- Dave Quote
Guest John Mason Jr Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 ~BD~ wrote:<span style="color:blue"> > "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:Xns9BB498BACBEC3HHI2948AJD832@69.16.185.250...<span style="color:green"><span style="color:darkred"> >>> How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good >>> thing to do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of >>> 'nasties' from the machine of a user, how can that user be certain >>> that it hasn't actually installed some badware too?</span></span> > <span style="color:green"> >> Just one question.... Are you high?</span> > <span style="color:green"> >> -- >> Regards, >> Dustin Cook >> Malware Researcher >> MalwareBytes - http://www.malwarebytes.org >></span> > > > No, Sir! > > Still naive? Probably! > > Correct me where I am wrong, please. > > My understanding is that 'malware' can be, and is, installed surrepticiously > upon millions of computers around the world. Often, a user is unaware that a > machine has been compromised. > > There are many 'help' forums available on the Internet. It seems only > logical that some such operations may take advantage of inexperienced folk > who do, without a second thought, download all manner of executable > programmes onto their machines (as instructed by a 'helper'). > > Once a machine has been declared 'clean' - how can the average user possibly > know that something 'nastie' has not been added to their machine if it > appears to operate 'normally'? > > This couldn't/wouldn't happen? Are you sure? > > -- > Dave > > </span> You should only download & run software on your computer that you trust, you need to decide what level of verification you require, and make appropriate decisions. John Quote
Guest Max Wachtel Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 ~BD~, after much thought, came up with this jewel:<span style="color:blue"> > "Max Wachtel" <maxwachtel@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message > news:gnejt7$7hl$1@reader.motzarella.org...<span style="color:green"> >> ~BD~, after much thought, came up with this jewel:<span style="color:darkred"> >>> Before I answer you in this thread, Pete, I'd like you to contact me >>> again by email ........... and this time grant permission for me to >>> respond to you in like manner. I respected your wishes previously - if >>> you really are one of the good guys, please respond to this request. >>> Thank you. style_emoticons/ >>></span> >> You still haven't figured out who the good guys are yet? >> I'm not sure if there is any hope for you...... >> -- >> Virus Removal http://max.shplink.com/removal.html >> Keep Clean http://max.shplink.com/keepingclean.html >> Change nomail.afraid.org to gmail.com to reply by email. >> nomail.afraid.org is specifically setup for use in USENET</span> > > When I first came to the groups I believed everyone . In the case of the > Microsoft groups I naively thought everything was being moderated and > checked by Microsoft itself. Doh! > > I'd been led to believe that any 'bad' posts would be scorned by 'the good > guys' - just like folk gang-up on The Real Truth MVP (PCButts1). > > One of those supposedly 'good guys' was/is Robear Dyer (PA Bear) but he has > lied - he's told everyone 'here' who cares to read that I (~BD~, BoaterDave, > Beady, Imbeady2 and John_D) have been banned/sacked by a number of ISP's. > That is one simple fact which I KNOW, categorically, is a lie. It simply > isn't true. Or maybe it wasn't really him posting at all - it could have > been an imposter, couldn't it? style_emoticons/</span> I can't believe your still ranting about bear-give it a rest (makes you look like a troll). -- Virus Removal http://max.shplink.com/removal.html Keep Clean http://max.shplink.com/keepingclean.html Change nomail.afraid.org to gmail.com to reply by email. nomail.afraid.org is specifically setup for use in USENET Quote
Guest Tom [Pepper] Willett Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 You are absolutely nuts. "~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in message news:gnem3l$u0u$1@news.motzarella.org... : : "Max Wachtel" <maxwachtel@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message : news:gnejt7$7hl$1@reader.motzarella.org... : > ~BD~, after much thought, came up with this jewel: : >> Before I answer you in this thread, Pete, I'd like you to contact me : >> again by email ........... and this time grant permission for me to : >> respond to you in like manner. I respected your wishes previously - if : >> you really are one of the good guys, please respond to this request. : >> Thank you. style_emoticons/ : >> : > You still haven't figured out who the good guys are yet? : > I'm not sure if there is any hope for you...... : > -- : > Virus Removal http://max.shplink.com/removal.html : > Keep Clean http://max.shplink.com/keepingclean.html : > Change nomail.afraid.org to gmail.com to reply by email. : > nomail.afraid.org is specifically setup for use in USENET : : When I first came to the groups I believed everyone . In the case of the : Microsoft groups I naively thought everything was being moderated and : checked by Microsoft itself. Doh! : : I'd been led to believe that any 'bad' posts would be scorned by 'the good : guys' - just like folk gang-up on The Real Truth MVP (PCButts1). : : One of those supposedly 'good guys' was/is Robear Dyer (PA Bear) but he has : lied - he's told everyone 'here' who cares to read that I (~BD~, BoaterDave, : Beady, Imbeady2 and John_D) have been banned/sacked by a number of ISP's. : That is one simple fact which I KNOW, categorically, is a lie. It simply : isn't true. Or maybe it wasn't really him posting at all - it could have : been an imposter, couldn't it? style_emoticons/ : -- : Dave : : Quote
Guest ~BD~ Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 "John Mason Jr" <notvalid@cox.net.invalid> wrote in message news:gnf06j$327$1@reader.motzarella.org...<span style="color:blue"> > ~BD~ wrote:<span style="color:green"> >> "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:Xns9BB498BACBEC3HHI2948AJD832@69.16.185.250...<span style="color:darkred"> >>>> How would a Windows user know that installing MBAM really is a good >>>> thing to do? Whilst the programme may well remove all manner of >>>> 'nasties' from the machine of a user, how can that user be certain >>>> that it hasn't actually installed some badware too?</span> >><span style="color:darkred"> >>> Just one question.... Are you high?</span> >><span style="color:darkred"> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> Dustin Cook >>> Malware Researcher >>> MalwareBytes - http://www.malwarebytes.org >>></span> >> >> >> No, Sir! >> >> Still naive? Probably! >> >> Correct me where I am wrong, please. >> >> My understanding is that 'malware' can be, and is, installed >> surrepticiously upon millions of computers around the world. Often, a >> user is unaware that a machine has been compromised. >> >> There are many 'help' forums available on the Internet. It seems only >> logical that some such operations may take advantage of inexperienced >> folk who do, without a second thought, download all manner of executable >> programmes onto their machines (as instructed by a 'helper'). >> >> Once a machine has been declared 'clean' - how can the average user >> possibly know that something 'nastie' has not been added to their >> machine if it appears to operate 'normally'? >> >> This couldn't/wouldn't happen? Are you sure? >> >> -- >> Dave</span> > > > You should only download & run software on your computer that you trust, > you need to decide what level of verification you require, and make > appropriate decisions. > > > John</span> Thank you for taking the trouble to respond, John. I do understand! I do not doubt the credibility of MBAM even though the facility came from nowhere in a very short time - what is it now? Three years perhaps? In a similar timescale, SuperAntiSpyware came from nowhere too. I still remember that expression "There's no such thing as a free lunch". My point was - still is - that when people experience computer problems, and end up in newsgroups seeking help, they are directed to unknown places (for them). They are then invited to download all manner of 'cleaning' material - about which they have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever - and they put blind trust in their 'helper'. Such activity, IMO, is wide open to abuse. -- Dave Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.