Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Getback on April 21, 2011, 02:27:39 PM
-
Well need a replacement for sure. Still though AVAST was throwing off dozens of errors. Wouldn't let me into the AH bbs and several other sites. Said AH was a virus and the list went on. Since then my number of kills of gone up and my number of assists have gone down.
-
micro soft security essentials...threatfire....ma lwere bytes anti malware(sp?).......the last one anti malware(sp?) was the only one that was able to find and remove a virus I had gotten.
Eset=sux
AVG=sux
AVAST=sux
-
micro soft security essentials...threatfire....ma lwere bytes anti malware(sp?).......the last one anti malware(sp?) was the only one that was able to find and remove a virus I had gotten.
Eset=sux
AVG=sux
AVAST=sux
I would like another take on this. I error on the side of caution.
-
I would like another take on this. I error on the side of caution.
by all means.
this is just my opinion
many like AVG and ESET
personally they didn't find the virus I had anti malware did though.
-
I've actually been happy with ESET NOD32. I'm surprised you had a problem with it Ink.
-
Truth be told, there is no one anti-xxxx solution which will always catch everything.
-
by all means.
this is just my opinion
many like AVG and ESET
personally they didn't find the virus I had anti malware did though.
I fear intrusiveness from MS. So while I do value your opinion I wanted a little more input.
-
I like Microsoft's Security Essentials. It's fairly non intrusive and isn't a resource hog (and free). I've been running it on 4 machines without issues. The only time that one got a bug was due to my brother's unsafe browsing practices. He tends to get bugs on any machine he touches though, so it was expected. :bhead
-
Truth be told, there is no one anti-xxxx solution which will always catch everything.
that's why I use all three that I listed...... I shoulda said that in my original post
I've actually been happy with ESET NOD32. I'm surprised you had a problem with it Ink.
ya its supposed to be good but I got a virus that it never found(and allowed to run), but anti malware did, but then again Threatfire didn't find it ether, I was not using the MSE at the time.
-
I've actually been happy with ESET NOD32.
I've used ESET Smart Security 4 for the last 2.5 years and not a single Virus. Then again, I have never received a virus ever.
I just run the Suite and it's done. I can game with it on and have never had a single pop up yet. If I did, I sure as hell wouldn't be pissed as it would notify me of an intrusion.
-
I use kaspersky. Kaspersky has game mode and sandboxie. I am not doing any gaming and never used the mode when I did. I do use sandboxie at times and I am used to the GUI of kaspersky and been happy with the software.
Skuzzy says it correct anyway in above post.
I have never used eset , but comes highly recommended in these forums.
I used to use a program called returnil. The software creates a virtual OS of the operating OS in your PC. I liked the software for web browsing, email which might raise a eyebrow. I use sandboxie now.
AV may not detect all malware either. A while back I ended up with malware called fakealert. I ended up using counterspy trial version to find and remove it.
As said before, good browsing habits is a big plus.
I also don't use MS system restore in thier OS. I use other software for backing up.
I am not endorsing Kaspersky or any other AV, just my experience, my penny and a half.
-
I don't use an AV. I just watch what I download. I have Malwarebytes installed in case.
-
I use Avira, but good surfing habits are much more important than a good anti-virus.
-
by all means.
this is just my opinion
many like AVG and ESET
personally they didn't find the virus I had anti malware did though.
That because no AV is foolproof against everything. And its always a good idea to keep at least the free version of malwarebites on your machine and updated.
If ALL you have is malwarebytes on our machine. You will almost certainly leave yourself open to something else. But MB combined with ESET is a damn good combo.
BTW most malware infections are due to user....error. To be polite about it.
I've never known a single person that got maleware on a machine where someone didnt click when they shouldnt have clicked anything at all.
Usually because the people who got it didnt know what to do
The most frequent I've seen are the ones that advertise themselves as an anti virus window.
Close the browser from task manager or shut down the machine via the power switch. will oftewn stop it in its tracks before it can do anything
-
That because no AV is foolproof against everything. And its always a good idea to keep at least the free version of malwarebites on your machine and updated.
If ALL you have is malwarebytes on our machine. You will almost certainly leave yourself open to something else. But MB combined with ESET is a damn good combo.
BTW most malware infections are due to user....error. To be polite about it.
I've never known a single person that got maleware on a machine where someone didnt click when they shouldnt have clicked anything at all.
Usually because the people who got it didnt know what to do
The most frequent I've seen are the ones that advertise themselves as an anti virus window.
Close the browser from task manager or shut down the machine via the power switch. will oftewn stop it in its tracks before it can do anything
thanx for tips...and ya I know it's user error :uhoh
-
I've actually been happy with ESET NOD32. I'm surprised you had a problem with it Ink.
Same here,I have it on two systems and have had 0 problems with it.
-
The threat of virus infection increase's depending on what type of sites you visit i presume :old:
-
Threatfire and safe browsing habits here.
Threatfire isn't typical AV, it doesn't scan, just very small sits in the background and watch's for the kinds of changes virus's make, rootkits, registry changes, etc.
I've been very happy with it for several years.
If I am concerned that I might have picked up a bug then Trend Micro's housecall, or malwarebytes anti malware.
-
It is not just user error anymore. Sites you think you can trust can be infected. For a while there were tens of thousands of Windows based servers that got infected due to a security problem in Windows. There are still thousands of those sites running.
I hit a banking site the other day that was infected. My computer was not bothered by it, and I do not run any anti-anything software. Government sites are also prone to dishing out viruses. Here is a clue. If they use Java (script or language), or ActiveX controls, they could be delivering an unwanted program to your computer. Never trust a site that hides its source from you. At least, with access to the source of the page, you can see where the problem is.
This gets us to the big problem of knowing where a virus/worm/malware came from. Most will lie dormant on your computer until some event happens that will cause them to go active. While dormant, they quietly replicate themselves on your computer and any other computer on your LAN. Most people trust the computers on thier LAN and that is a big security failure.
Enabling basic file sharing, with no security, is what most viruses count on. People prove every day they are lazy about security and do not want to be bothered with it. Thus the market for anti-xxx software. I am not saying anti-xxxx software is a bad thing. I am saying if you depend on it for 100% protection, you have left yourself open for all manner of bad things.
Take some time to configure the security settings in Windows as the defaults leave the computer wide open for anything.
-
Well need a replacement for sure. Still though AVAST was throwing off dozens of errors. Wouldn't let me into the AH bbs and several other sites. Said AH was a virus and the list went on. Since then my number of kills of gone up and my number of assists have gone down.
i've been using avast free version for a couple of years now and never seen any behavior like that.
-
. While dormant, they quietly replicate themselves on your computer and any other computer on your LAN. Most people trust the computers on thier LAN and that is a big security failure.
Enabling basic file sharing, with no security, is what most viruses count on. People prove every day they are lazy about security and do not want to be bothered with it. Thus the market for anti-xxx software. I am not saying anti-xxxx software is a bad thing. I am saying if you depend on it for 100% protection, you have left yourself open for all manner of bad things.
Take some time to configure the security settings in Windows as the defaults leave the computer wide open for anything.
This is true too. Not that the other stuff isnt. I havent come across it yet.
I have 4 computers at my house. Not one can access anything on any of the others. So if anything happens. Its isolated and I can use one of the others to help me resove the problem machine.
I've had one on my machine that was from my own stupidity about a year or so ago.
The other have had several. Mostly due to people doing things I told them not to do.
My daughter was the worst culprit. For a while there she thought if it looked cool she should just go ahead and download it. She's getting better and more savvy lately though.
-
This is true too. Not that the other stuff isnt. I havent come across it yet.
I have 4 computers at my house. Not one can access anything on any of the others. So if anything happens. Its isolated and I can use one of the others to help me resove the problem machine.
I've had one on my machine that was from my own stupidity about a year or so ago.
The other have had several. Mostly due to people doing things I told them not to do.
My daughter was the worst culprit. For a while there she thought if it looked cool she should just go ahead and download it. She's getting better and more savvy lately though.
Actually you're still at risk just by having the computers on the same lan. If you have an unpatched flaw that a worm can exploit, your computers will all get infected once one catches it. You would need to have a dual nat layer isolating the computers to be safe from that.
-
I need to read up on security I think. I have a lan. Only the other comp is out right now.
-
I use Avira, but good surfing habits are much more important than a good anti-virus.
this tip from fugi helped me been good ever since free + small footprint= happiness
-
Well need a replacement for sure. Still though AVAST was throwing off dozens of errors. Wouldn't let me into the AH bbs and several other sites. Said AH was a virus and the list went on. Since then my number of kills of gone up and my number of assists have gone down.
Iv'e been running AVAST for years and never experienced these issues. Sounds like you may have an issue with something other than AVAST.
I also periodically run a scan with Malware bytes.
-
My parents just got hit with XP security 2011 malware. Yes, they had an updated AVG running. So much for 'anti' virus.
After malware removal all file associations (including .exe) were broken :D
Needless to say I installed Ubuntu and spent a few minutes teaching them how to use it instead of windows. Going to save a lot of my time in the future.
-
My parents just got hit with XP security 2011 malware. Yes, they had an updated AVG running. So much for 'anti' virus.
After malware removal all file associations (including .exe) were broken :D
Needless to say I installed Ubuntu and spent a few minutes teaching them how to use it instead of windows. Going to save a lot of my time in the future.
My Dad got hit with the same. He simply installed a recovery disk I made for him and he was good to go. I didn't even know about it until all was said and done. AND I didn't have to spend time showing him how to use Ubuntu and I don't have to worry about random phone calls from him asking me how to do things with an operating system he's not familiar with.
He would FLIP if I tried to make him use Ubuntu. Many older people are very resistant to change and he would inundate me with phone calls to whine and cry and complain until I put Windows back on for him. I think most people's parents would be like this.
It's great to hear that your parents accepted what you did with open arms, but most people aren't like that. Also there are few programs that are natively supported by a Linux environment so your solution would actually work for very few of us.
-
My Dad got hit with the same. He simply installed a recovery disk I made for him and he was good to go. I didn't even know about it until all was said and done. AND I didn't have to spend time showing him how to use Ubuntu and I don't have to worry about random phone calls from him asking me how to do things with an operating system he's not familiar with.
He would FLIP if I tried to make him use Ubuntu. Many older people are very resistant to change and he would inundate me with phone calls to whine and cry and complain until I put Windows back on for him. I think most people's parents would be like this.
It's great to hear that your parents accepted what you did with open arms, but most people aren't like that. Also there are few programs that are natively supported by a Linux environment so your solution would actually work for very few of us.
Actually nowadays you can do most things on linux that you can do on windows. While your recovery solution was admirable your solution required you to spend the time proactively and you leave yourself open for another and another attack. The worst ones being malware that remains hidden and just silently steals data (internet banking, credit card purchases).
Knowing my parents usage patterns I knew they'd have no trouble switching to linux. My mother was very much against the change, she claimed she won't be able to learn to use it at this age anymore. About 15 minutes later she could do everything on linux she used to do on their old XP.
Receive/send e-mail: Check
Watch/edit pictures: Check
Watch/edit digital home movies: Check
Sync phone with computer: Check
Play flash games: Check
Handle office documents: Check
Skype: Check
Facebook: Check
General internet browsing: Check - and as added bonus no 'scary' sites anymore. Installed noscript on linux too though.
My step-dad has always been interested in coding and now he has multiple open source tools available through Ubuntu app store. They have multitude of music options through Ubuntu One (commercial and free).
To be honest I would have bought them a mac if I couldn't do this free of charge.
-
Actually nowadays you can do most things on linux that you can do on windows. While your recovery solution was admirable your solution required you to spend the time proactively and you leave yourself open for another and another attack. The worst ones being malware that remains hidden and just silently steals data (internet banking, credit card purchases).
Knowing my parents usage patterns I knew they'd have no trouble switching to linux. My mother was very much against the change, she claimed she won't be able to learn to use it at this age anymore. About 15 minutes later she could do everything on linux she used to do on their old XP.
Receive/send e-mail: Check
Watch/edit pictures: Check
Watch/edit digital home movies: Check
Sync phone with computer: Check
Play flash games: Check
Handle office documents: Check
Skype: Check
Facebook: Check
General internet browsing: Check - and as added bonus no 'scary' sites anymore. Installed noscript on linux too though.
My step-dad has always been interested in coding and now he has multiple open source tools available through Ubuntu app store. They have multitude of music options through Ubuntu One (commercial and free).
To be honest I would have bought them a mac if I couldn't do this free of charge.
Heh famous last words. You can't blame windows for peoples ignorance/stupidity. I see there's a fake AV java thing going around for mac's now too (seems to be hooked into google image poisoning). OH and a nice DIY Botnetter for mac's.
My house: layer 7 firewall, gateway AV, AS, IPS, App management, Content filtering, integrated with SSO/AD for user rights. Works a treat, keeps the bad stuff out. Plus the usual desktop AV (I like mcafee corporate).
My 6 year old's on the net regularly, never had a problem.
-
Heh famous last words. You can't blame windows for peoples ignorance/stupidity. I see there's a fake AV java thing going around for mac's now too (seems to be hooked into google image poisoning). OH and a nice DIY Botnetter for mac's.
My house: layer 7 firewall, gateway AV, AS, IPS, App management, Content filtering, integrated with SSO/AD for user rights. Works a treat, keeps the bad stuff out. Plus the usual desktop AV (I like mcafee corporate).
My 6 year old's on the net regularly, never had a problem.
Mmkay. 20 000 weekly new attacks against windows and 1 DIY botnetter for mac in the last 20 years. Clearly I should start to panic now.
My house: NAT router, no av and no troubles. I no longer live at my parents so I have no control over their habits though :D
-
Mmkay. 20 000 weekly new attacks against windows and 1 DIY botnetter for mac in the last 20 years. Clearly I should start to panic now.
My house: NAT router, no av and no troubles. I no longer live at my parents so I have no control over their habits though :D
It's the first DIY botnet, there are several private mac botnets ;)
However - which do you trust, the system with a few attacks and no protection, or the system with many attacks and lots of protection?
-
It's the first DIY botnet, there are several private mac botnets ;)
However - which do you trust, the system with a few attacks and no protection, or the system with many attacks and lots of protection?
Security by obscurity works well. Mac has antiviruses available (I've scanned a couple times manually with clamxav and linux boot disc) and osx has a built in malware remover that has the few known exploits under check.
I have a better chance to win in lottery than end up to a website that has an attack that can bypass noscript and is targeted specially against Apple. I don't use illegal software which gives me a huge layer of protection.
Then again windows attacks and exploits are plentiful and daily. Even the best protections always lag behind, someone first has to discover the attack in order to create a 'protection' against it. And as we've seen so many times, having protection most of the times means nothing. The malware goes around it in a heartbeat anyway.
-
And yet I have been using the Internet since the DARPANet days and have never had to deal with a virus, malware, or spyware. I have never used any type of anti-xxx software as well.
-
And yet I have been using the Internet since the DARPANet days and have never had to deal with a virus, malware, or spyware. I have never used any type of anti-xxx software as well.
Yes but your approach is very spartan indeed. Most people who have problems go about downloading and clicking whatever crosses their way and using default security settings. And without a doubt this is by a large part because of false sense of security created by AVs.
-
Not so sure if "spartan" is what I would call it. In the last 6 months I have installed about 1TB of data, all from the Internet. If that defines "spartan", these days, then there are far too many people with far too much free time on their hands.
-
Not so sure if "spartan" is what I would call it. In the last 6 months I have installed about 1TB of data, all from the Internet. If that defines "spartan", these days, then there are far too many people with far too much free time on their hands.
If I understood right you don't watch youtube, play flash games, do facebook in general? That's considered spartan these days :) Not to mention the down right risky stuff people do online.
-
Never had to deal with a virus/spyware/malware to date. Sorry, I guess all of that Facebookin' I do puts me at risk. :rofl
-
Never had to deal with a virus/spyware/malware to date. Sorry, I guess all of that Facebookin' I do puts me at risk. :rofl
Actually it does. Social networks are the hottest thing to target nowadays for malware makers. I think my parents got infected from a facebook worm that directed them to an external site and download which contained the payload.
The worm had extracted the friend information of some user, then sent image sharing notifications to all of the facebook friends and my mother naturally accepted the offer to view images even though the link was to a third party provider. Classic case of social engineering.
Funny thing was that I got the same exact offer to my hotmail account after she got infected too, despite having my FB account canceled long time ago. I immediately called my mother and verified if she actually sent an invitation to something and why. By then her computer was already rendered unusable by the fake av.
-
If I understood right you don't watch youtube, play flash games, do facebook in general? That's considered spartan these days :) Not to mention the down right risky stuff people do online.
Different priorities do not define how the Internet is used or not used. With over 20 years invested in programs/utilities and data, I prefer to not take the inherent risks associated with casual cruising of fluff sites (Youtube, Facebook,....). It is a personal priority.
The general definition of "spartan" is to be simple, frugal, and/or austere. What I do with my computer is anything but that, thus the desire to protect it from malicious software. Would you leave a diamond ring in the middle of a busy mall, for anyone to pick up?
Your opinion is yours and yours alone as it does not reflect the reality of what I do with my computer. Stating that opinion on a bulletin board does not make it any less of an opinion. I'll not state my opinion of what I think of those who waste time with Facebook and/or Youtube. :)
-
I stopped using anti-virus from 1998 (year I got mcse) to 2008.
I got one virus and manually removed it.............but I did use a firewall.
The advent or root kits, though, determines that some sort of live scanner is needed when browsing.
Browsing habits determine infection events more than anything else.
Any time I've seen a pop up window concerning "virus check" or any fake ass'd virus message designed to spoof a anti virus software message, I immediately alt/f4 all open windows rather than try to click it closed.
If you think you've experienced an "event", best to alt/f4 any application you are running, check under hkeylocalmachine/software/microsoft/windows/current version/run for something you don't remember being there, check you 'start up" on the start menu, and go through the other places an executable can be run from msconfig or compmgmt.msc..........as well....check what processes are running.
I also use DLLshow to see hidden processes and google search them to see threat level.
Once that is done, run a malware/malicious software/virus scan.
This should all be done before a restart (if possible).
I currently run microsoft security essentials and have the firewall tightly controlled and a shortcut to the microsoft malicious software removal tool but I have them set up so as not running by default and only use them while browsing and not during gaming.
I also run all security scans right before I do any online bill paying or purchasing.
-
Different priorities do not define how the Internet is used or not used. With over 20 years invested in programs/utilities and data, I prefer to not take the inherent risks associated with casual cruising of fluff sites (Youtube, Facebook,....). It is a personal priority.
The general definition of "spartan" is to be simple, frugal, and/or austere. What I do with my computer is anything but that, thus the desire to protect it from malicious software. Would you leave a diamond ring in the middle of a busy mall, for anyone to pick up?
Your opinion is yours and yours alone as it does not reflect the reality of what I do with my computer. Stating that opinion on a bulletin board does not make it any less of an opinion. I'll not state my opinion of what I think of those who waste time with Facebook and/or Youtube. :)
There are some damn funnyy vids on youtube. Not a lot of viruses ether never got one from there.
-
Browsing habits determine infection events more than anything else.
Probably the most misunderstood myths and incorrect statements relating to malware out there.
-
Security by obscurity works well. Mac has antiviruses available (I've scanned a couple times manually with clamxav and linux boot disc) and osx has a built in malware remover that has the few known exploits under check.
I have a better chance to win in lottery than end up to a website that has an attack that can bypass noscript and is targeted specially against Apple. I don't use illegal software which gives me a huge layer of protection.
Then again windows attacks and exploits are plentiful and daily. Even the best protections always lag behind, someone first has to discover the attack in order to create a 'protection' against it. And as we've seen so many times, having protection most of the times means nothing. The malware goes around it in a heartbeat anyway.
See that last paragraph, you always get hung up on it. Sorry to get personal but you really have no idea what you are talking about. Good AV does not require the vector to be known to protect against it. And malware doesn't go around it in a heartbeat. You really need to sit down and google behavioral protection with regards to AV and malware protection. To top things off you talk about using clamav (one of the worst purely signature based scanners ever known) with Mac OS X's built in protection that has no method for automatic updates and is purely signature based. Got a large dose of irony going on there.
Now here's the difference. There's a nice hole out for Skype for OS X - a hole you can drive a bus through - no fix apart from uninstalling Skype. Whereas on Windows with good AV (not the junk half you lot use) you have a second line of defense (McAfee for example would prevent the overflow, or any payload executing).
-
Probably the most misunderstood myths and incorrect statements relating to malware out there.
How is that incorrect?
Please prove your point and give percentages of infections to support it.
-
See that last paragraph, you always get hung up on it. Sorry to get personal but you really have no idea what you are talking about. Good AV does not require the vector to be known to protect against it. And malware doesn't go around it in a heartbeat. You really need to sit down and google behavioral protection with regards to AV and malware protection. To top things off you talk about using clamav (one of the worst purely signature based scanners ever known) with Mac OS X's built in protection that has no method for automatic updates and is purely signature based. Got a large dose of irony going on there.
Now here's the difference. There's a nice hole out for Skype for OS X - a hole you can drive a bus through - no fix apart from uninstalling Skype. Whereas on Windows with good AV (not the junk half you lot use) you have a second line of defense (McAfee for example would prevent the overflow, or any payload executing).
You seem to forget that there are no more than a handful of attacks to worry about today, a fixed database of exploits is pretty effective in that situation. Your bus wide hole in Skype would require someone from my skype contacts to get infected before the flaw gets patched in Skype. I'm not losing sleep over it. :) Especially considering the flaw is already patched before any known exploits were spread on it - I'd like that to happen on windows some day.
Tell me, what is your magical av solution that is bullet proof as you claim? Eset is not good enough, Norton not good enough, Kaspersky not good enough - and yet they all bog down your computer more or less even before you got infected.
I've seen so many malware riddled computers with running avs that sorry I find your trust in them pretty baseless.
McAfee has a 96,8% detection rate in the 2011 tests of _known exploits_ http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_od_feb2011.pdf
If there are 2 million of known Windows viruses around today your box will be left open to about 64000 known attacks and unknown number of 0-day attacks.
-
Vulcan, you really need to stress the corporate version of McAfee is what you are talking about when you say it is a good AV program.
The consumer version sucks.
ink, for me, youtube is fluff and not worth my time or risk to my computer. I really hate what it has done to the Internet, in terms of bandwidth being wasted.
-
How is that incorrect?
Please prove your point and give percentages of infections to support it.
There are plenty of examples of malware being delivered via legitimate (non-porn) websites. Typically most malware is delivered via compromised advertising sites. Read here: http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10353402-245.html or here http://www.kaspersky.com/news?id=207576042
The very nature of the Internet makes it the perfect medium for spreading malicious programs. In the past, cybercriminals would entice users to malicious sites they had created, but they have recently changed tack by making use of legitimate resources that have been compromised. A script is added to the compromised pages which redirects users to a malicious website. If the attack is successful, malware is downloaded to the victim machine without the user’s knowledge.
It's been that way for years. You prove your stats, you made the initial statement, now back it up.
-
You seem to forget that there are no more than a handful of attacks to worry about today, a fixed database of exploits is pretty effective in that situation. Your bus wide hole in Skype would require someone from my skype contacts to get infected before the flaw gets patched in Skype. I'm not losing sleep over it. :) Especially considering the flaw is already patched before any known exploits were spread on it - I'd like that to happen on windows some day.
Tell me, what is your magical av solution that is bullet proof as you claim? Eset is not good enough, Norton not good enough, Kaspersky not good enough - and yet they all bog down your computer more or less even before you got infected.
I've seen so many malware riddled computers with running avs that sorry I find your trust in them pretty baseless.
McAfee has a 96,8% detection rate in the 2011 tests of _known exploits_ http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_od_feb2011.pdf
If there are 2 million of known Windows viruses around today your box will be left open to about 64000 known attacks and unknown number of 0-day attacks.
and AV Comparitives does not test the behavioral features of those AV scanners. You seem to be stuck in a forever loop of not understanding the technology - do I have to draw you a picture?
-
There are plenty of examples of malware being delivered via legitimate (non-porn) websites. Typically most malware is delivered via compromised advertising sites. Read here: http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10353402-245.html or here http://www.kaspersky.com/news?id=207576042
And this can easily be stoped simply by running noscript which will stop any ads ever from loading.
-
and AV Comparitives does not test the behavioral features of those AV scanners. You seem to be stuck in a forever loop of not understanding the technology - do I have to draw you a picture?
You're in the loop of trusting a technology that has proven to fail over and over again. I have witnessed infections on computers equipped with almost every major antivirus program. I do not have to understand the technology when I have witnessed it fail repeatedly. While I haven't tested McAfee corp version, I doub't it's 100% proof either and even if it is, it's a moot point since most consumers don't have it obviously.
My recent experience with migrating my parents to linux has actually convinced me that it has now matured enough to be a serious alternative for windows for anyone who doesn't need to play windows based games or run non-office work related software. I'm doing my web browsing and work 100% on mac/linux as it is. The windows box is solely for steam/htc and stays that way. The day games will start to run on linux, I will be a happy man because then I can migrate my kid there too. Wife already plays her second life on Ubuntu client :)
-
While I haven't tested McAfee corp version
and I rest my case.
-
See Rule #4
-
Ahem...
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/an-applecare-support-rep-talks-mac-malware-is-getting-worse/3342
I can tell you for a fact, many, many people are falling for this attack. Our call volume here at AppleCare is 4-5x higher than normal and [the overwhelming majority] of our calls are about this Mac Defender and its aliases. Many frustrated Mac users think their Mac is impervious to viruses and think this is a real warning from Apple. I really wish I could say not many people will fall for this, but in this last week, we have had nothing but Mac Defender and similar calls.
told...
...you...
........so...
:D
-
Ahem...
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/an-applecare-support-rep-talks-mac-malware-is-getting-worse/3342
told...
...you...
........so...
:D
Tell me, how does macdefender get installed on a mac? :D Furthermore what does it do after being installed? Surely something nasty like windows viruses?
-
Tell me, how does macdefender get installed on a mac? :D Furthermore what does it do after being installed? Surely something nasty like windows viruses?
same way windows malware tries to.
-
same way windows malware tries to.
Heheh eeeek wrong. It has to be installed manually by the user and it doesnt include keyloggers or anything like that even if it does.
-
Heheh eeeek wrong. It has to be installed manually by the user and it doesnt include keyloggers or anything like that even if it does.
Seriously dude :) - that's how malware works, Windows or otherwise. And yes OS X malware includes stuff like keyloggers, DNS redirectors etc.
-
Seriously dude :) - that's how malware works, Windows or otherwise. And yes OS X malware includes stuff like keyloggers, DNS redirectors etc.
No, macdefender (which was the topic here) does not contain any malicious payload out of offering users to buy its license. Malware on windows installs silently without user consent. Macdefender needs to be installed by the user using a standard GUI setup. Furthermore macdefender doesn't even affect users that do not use Safari with default security settings.
So, 2 million for windows vs 20 some for Mac. You have to be extremely unlucky to even FIND a mac exploit even if you try online, and reverse is true for windows.
-
malware on windows does not silently install, it requires user interaction. If someone emails me a virus, I do not get infected by opening the email. I must first open the attachment, then depending on the level of UAC settings it may install with or without prompts. You're confusing a worm with malware.
And for all the rarity you claim of macdefender applecare appears to be flooded with calls from infected users.
Finally some mac users are reporting it is phoning home. That my friend is a perfect example of a malware payload.
-
malware on windows does not silently install, it requires user interaction. If someone emails me a virus, I do not get infected by opening the email. I must first open the attachment, then depending on the level of UAC settings it may install with or without prompts. You're confusing a worm with malware.
And for all the rarity you claim of macdefender applecare appears to be flooded with calls from infected users.
Finally some mac users are reporting it is phoning home. That my friend is a perfect example of a malware payload.
Yep.
-
malware on windows does not silently install, it requires user interaction. If someone emails me a virus, I do not get infected by opening the email. I must first open the attachment, then depending on the level of UAC settings it may install with or without prompts. You're confusing a worm with malware.
And for all the rarity you claim of macdefender applecare appears to be flooded with calls from infected users.
Finally some mac users are reporting it is phoning home. That my friend is a perfect example of a malware payload.
Sorry but there are a gazillion malwares which silently install on windows through browsers, especially through IE. The user doesn't have to go through a several step standard GUI installation. Situation is a little bit better on w7/Vista where the user might get an UAC prompt all by sudden which he can guess might not be valid but no indication an installation is in process and only if the user has left UAC on. Many haven't.
Macdefender is automatically loaded by the Safari browser if the 'run safe attachment automatically' option is on in Safari. It automatically extracts the zip file which will then execute a .dmg installation package. The user will then have to click through a standard installation procedure. At any time the user can stop the install and even after installation the removal can be done like to any regular program.
Those reports of apple care being 'flooded' are sensationalist exaggerations coming out of mac haters such as a certain few on this forum :)
And no, I'm not confusing a worm with malware.
-
Sorry but there are a gazillion malwares which silently install on windows through browsers, especially through IE. The user doesn't have to go through a several step standard GUI installation.
Be interested to see an example of malware which does not require a user to click on something, open something, or run something on the Windows platform within the last 5 years.
-
Be interested to see an example of malware which does not require a user to click on something, open something, or run something on the Windows platform within the last 5 years.
http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Exploit-for-new-Flash-vulnerability-spreading-fast-1019485.html
All you need to do is view a video and rest is automatic. x86 code execution on runtime and rest is history :)
With this kind of holes in the open I'm pretty satisfied with having 20 exploits in the wild vs 2 million. Odds are stacked heavy in my favour not to get hit by one.
More info on drive-by downloads and installs at http://www.malware-info.com/mal_faq_inject.html
-
http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Exploit-for-new-Flash-vulnerability-spreading-fast-1019485.html
All you need to do is view a video and rest is automatic. x86 code execution on runtime and rest is history :)
With this kind of holes in the open I'm pretty satisfied with having 20 exploits in the wild vs 2 million. Odds are stacked heavy in my favour not to get hit by one.
More info on drive-by downloads and installs at http://www.malware-info.com/mal_faq_inject.html
Well, first you have to download and open the PDF. So your example fails right there.
-
and lets have a look at the CERT notes for the exploit:
A critical vulnerability exists in Adobe Flash Player 10.0.45.2 and earlier versions for Windows, Macintosh, Linux and Solaris operating systems, and the authplay.dll component that ships with Adobe Reader and Acrobat 9.x for Windows, Macintosh and UNIX operating systems. This vulnerability (CVE-2010-1297) could cause a crash and potentially allow an attacker to take control of the affected system. There are reports that this vulnerability is being actively exploited in the wild against both Adobe Flash Player, and Adobe Reader and Acrobat.
So in summary...
you have to download the PDF
you have to open the PDF
the vulnerability is multi platform including Mac OS X
How would this flow in the real world... on a typical Windows system these are your security mechanisms on order of prevention:
- AV signature spots malware and isolates download
- AV prevents execution from TEMP directory
- DEP prevents exploit (Win XP SP2 on)
- UAC prompts user for app installation
On a typical Mac system
- DEP prevents exploit
- user prompted for app app installation
The last two mechanisms are debateable though. DEP on Safari has proven easy to circumvent ( http://appleheadlines.com/2011/03/10/apple-safari-browser-gets-hacked-in-5-seconds/ ) and I'm sure the same applies for other OS's (these guys reckon they can get passed Chrome easily) - and users... well no explanation necessary.
So... as I already noted the exploit is not as silent at getting into the system as you think, and exploitable on an OS X system with typically less security mechanisms in place to prevent infection.
:)
-
Well, first you have to download and open the PDF. So your example fails right there.
You didn't even read the link. It's a FLASH vulnerability meaning any website with a malicious code injected flash advertisement will infect your computer. Your only protection is to prevent flash video from loading at all.
UAC and antiviruses can and will be bypassed with ease. It has happened a million times and will happen again. Most people who get infected actively use antiviruses.
So, every system can be bypassed and infected. Linux/Mac have perhaps 20 active infections in the wild vs 2 million for windows. You'd have to win the lottery to run into one online.
-
You didn't even read the link. It's a FLASH vulnerability meaning any website with a malicious code injected flash advertisement will infect your computer. Your only protection is to prevent flash video from loading at all.
I did read the link, as well as the secondary link on that page that describes how the exploit is used via a PDF which is needed to provision the exploit properly. Just a plain flash video with the exploit will result in a flash player crash with no security impact.
Looks like you didn't even read the link thoroughly.
-
I did read the link, as well as the secondary link on that page that describes how the exploit is used via a PDF which is needed to provision the exploit properly. Just a plain flash video with the exploit will result in a flash player crash with no security impact.
Looks like you didn't even read the link thoroughly.
The link was just one of the daily new flash exploits, there is no need for pdf or user interaction. It's a drive-by infection.
A drive-by download attack refers to the process of a user visiting an infected page and subsequently gets installed with malware, without his/her knowledge and without having him/her to click on or to agree to anything. Our previous post on HDD spreading itself via malvertising is a typical example of this type of threat.
http://blog.armorize.com/2011/04/newest-adobe-flash-0-day-used-in-new.html
-
The link was just one of the daily new flash exploits, there is no need for pdf or user interaction. It's a drive-by infection.
http://blog.armorize.com/2011/04/newest-adobe-flash-0-day-used-in-new.html
Once again the infection needs to be carried inside something else carrying the payload: http://blogs.technet.com/b/mmpc/archive/2011/04/12/analysis-of-the-cve-2011-0611-adobe-flash-player-vulnerability-exploitation.aspx
(note this is an analysis of an actual in the wild infection, not some "we think this is how it happens", even so your example notes it as a "drive-by cache is used instead of drive-by download".
-
Once again the infection needs to be carried inside something else carrying the payload: http://blogs.technet.com/b/mmpc/archive/2011/04/12/analysis-of-the-cve-2011-0611-adobe-flash-player-vulnerability-exploitation.aspx
(note this is an analysis of an actual in the wild infection, not some "we think this is how it happens", even so your example notes it as a "drive-by cache is used instead of drive-by download".
Drive-by infections are a daily fact of life. Even many members of AH forums have been exposed to them. I find pretty dumbfounding that you try to deny their existence considering last forum member reported of such just a couple weeks ago.
You can't deny that a windows user has a 2 000 000 to 20 higher chance of ever landing to an infected site or infected file compared to a Mac or Linux user. In fact the ratio is even more jilted since there are multiple copies of the 2 000 000 variants running wild. You can't deny that running advanced heuristics will eat a lot of cpu power and doing network filtering will cause net lag and unexpected behaviour. You can't deny that the higher detection rate a heuristic system has, the more false positives it will create and stop even legit programs from working as expected - and the fact that when ensuring compatibility it means letting some viruses slip past.
You can't deny there is no antivirus software ever built that could stop all the viruses, 0-day or even known ones.
So, you can choose to wear a flakjacket and a helmet and go running in front of a firing squad or choose to wear a hawaian shirt and go to places where there's practically no shooting at all. I prefer to dress light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoolWebSearch
-
your best anti virus would to stay away from porn
-
your best anti virus would to stay away from porn
skuzzy mentioned in another thread about a banking webpage being infected.
semp
-
skuzzy mentioned in another thread about a banking webpage being infected.
semp
ive heard that "mycleanpc.com" speeds up your computer only to crash within the next few days cause of a super virus that speeds it up past what your computer can handle.but it might not be true.
-
ive heard that "mycleanpc.com" speeds up your computer only to crash within the next few days cause of a super virus that speeds it up past what your computer can handle.but it might not be true.
mycleanpc.com has so many bad reviews, I wouldnt even bother to go their website. even wot has it redflagged.
semp