Firefox, AVG, and Infections

W. eWatson · Sep 2, 2009

I'm having some trouble with Firefox, and have gotten to the phase where
I decided to run a virus checker on my C: HD. My basic difficulty is
what I would call herky-jerky operation. When I'm typing or scrolling,
things stop for many seconds, then start. It came after a the plug from
my PC accidentally pulled out. FF failed upon recovery. I put it back
together by re-installing and retaining e-mail, etc. For awhile it
worked fine, but then started halting as above. I did a cclean, and that
got it rolling again, only for the problem to return within 10 or so hours.

I did a diagnostic on the HD and it passed. I then began to try a virus
check with AVG, which I have never used before. I have question about
what it report. If I knew of a web site to temporarily post images of
the vault, I'd post it.

I posted the following in the FF support group.
....

My virus scan with AVG proved very interesting. It found several
infections, three were trojans, several tracking cookies (associated
with FF and probably SeaMonkey, and a worm in
Doc&Settings/.../dialsys.exe. I took care of them. They are now in the
vault. That was all last evening.

Some hours of the scan I sat down at the PC to find AVG Resident Shield
had found two more Trojan Horses. Correcting thes matters last night
provided no change in the problem with FF that I reported.

What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them. By
the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
is certainly different.

Well, I'll continue to trouble shoot today as I can. Right now I'm just
using SeaMonkey.

David H. Lipman · Sep 3, 2009

From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>

| I'm having some trouble with Firefox, and have gotten to the phase where
| I decided to run a virus checker on my C: HD. My basic difficulty is
| what I would call herky-jerky operation. When I'm typing or scrolling,
| things stop for many seconds, then start. It came after a the plug from
| my PC accidentally pulled out. FF failed upon recovery. I put it back
| together by re-installing and retaining e-mail, etc. For awhile it
| worked fine, but then started halting as above. I did a cclean, and that
| got it rolling again, only for the problem to return within 10 or so hours.

| I did a diagnostic on the HD and it passed. I then began to try a virus
| check with AVG, which I have never used before. I have question about
| what it report. If I knew of a web site to temporarily post images of
| the vault, I'd post it.

| I posted the following in the FF support group.
| ...

| My virus scan with AVG proved very interesting. It found several
| infections, three were trojans, several tracking cookies (associated
| with FF and probably SeaMonkey, and a worm in
| Doc&Settings/.../dialsys.exe. I took care of them. They are now in the
| vault. That was all last evening.

| Some hours of the scan I sat down at the PC to find AVG Resident Shield
| had found two more Trojan Horses. Correcting thes matters last night
| provided no change in the problem with FF that I reported.

| What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
| Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them. By
| the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
| almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
| is certainly different.

| Well, I'll continue to trouble shoot today as I can. Right now I'm just
| using SeaMonkey.

Please add to your scan, Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware

PS: I doubt that AVG is "too sensitive" nor finding False Positives.

--
Dave

Multi-AV -

W. eWatson · Sep 3, 2009

David H. Lipman wrote:
> From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>
>
> | I'm having some trouble with Firefox, and have gotten to the phase where
> | I decided to run a virus checker on my C: HD. My basic difficulty is
> | what I would call herky-jerky operation. When I'm typing or scrolling,
> | things stop for many seconds, then start. It came after a the plug from
> | my PC accidentally pulled out. FF failed upon recovery. I put it back
> | together by re-installing and retaining e-mail, etc. For awhile it
> | worked fine, but then started halting as above. I did a cclean, and that
> | got it rolling again, only for the problem to return within 10 or so hours.
>
> | I did a diagnostic on the HD and it passed. I then began to try a virus
> | check with AVG, which I have never used before. I have question about
> | what it report. If I knew of a web site to temporarily post images of
> | the vault, I'd post it.
>
> | I posted the following in the FF support group.
> | ...
>
> | My virus scan with AVG proved very interesting. It found several
> | infections, three were trojans, several tracking cookies (associated
> | with FF and probably SeaMonkey, and a worm in
> | Doc&Settings/.../dialsys.exe. I took care of them. They are now in the
> | vault. That was all last evening.
>
> | Some hours of the scan I sat down at the PC to find AVG Resident Shield
> | had found two more Trojan Horses. Correcting thes matters last night
> | provided no change in the problem with FF that I reported.
>
> | What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
> | Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them. By
> | the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
> | almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
> | is certainly different.
>
> | Well, I'll continue to trouble shoot today as I can. Right now I'm just
> | using SeaMonkey.
>
> Please add to your scan, Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware
>
>
> PS: I doubt that AVG is "too sensitive" nor finding False Positives.
> 
On what basis do you think I should try another virus checker. A five
star review somewhere?

What I'm suggesting is there's a potential for some bias for sales
purposes. That's not necessarily directed at AVG. Is there a standards
committee on viruses, worms, etc.?

FromTheRafters · Sep 3, 2009

"W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:h7n8b1$dd8$1@news.eternal-september.org...
[...]

> What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
> Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them.
> By the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
> almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
> is certainly different.

Are you relying solely on the ISP's software to stop you from getting
malware?

[...]

You may have some corrupted files (as well as unseen malware). If it
were me, I'd flatten and rebuild.

Leythos · Sep 3, 2009

In article <h7n8b1$dd8$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
wolftracks@invalid.com says...
>
> I'm having some trouble with Firefox, and have gotten to the phase where
> I decided to run a virus checker on my C: HD. My basic difficulty is
> what I would call herky-jerky operation. When I'm typing or scrolling,
> things stop for many seconds, then start. It came after a the plug from
> my PC accidentally pulled out. FF failed upon recovery. I put it back
> together by re-installing and retaining e-mail, etc. For awhile it
> worked fine, but then started halting as above. I did a cclean, and that
> got it rolling again, only for the problem to return within 10 or so hours.
>
> I did a diagnostic on the HD and it passed. I then began to try a virus
> check with AVG, which I have never used before. I have question about
> what it report. If I knew of a web site to temporarily post images of
> the vault, I'd post it.
>
> I posted the following in the FF support group.
> ...
>
> My virus scan with AVG proved very interesting. It found several
> infections, three were trojans, several tracking cookies (associated
> with FF and probably SeaMonkey, and a worm in
> Doc&Settings/.../dialsys.exe. I took care of them. They are now in the
> vault. That was all last evening.
>
> Some hours of the scan I sat down at the PC to find AVG Resident Shield
> had found two more Trojan Horses. Correcting thes matters last night
> provided no change in the problem with FF that I reported.
>
> What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
> Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them. By
> the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
> almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
> is certainly different.
>
> Well, I'll continue to trouble shoot today as I can. Right now I'm just
> using SeaMonkey.

You need something better than AVG, my experience with hundreds of
computers using AVG is that it's one of the least protective out on the
market.

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

David H. Lipman · Sep 3, 2009

From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>

| David H. Lipman wrote:
>> From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>

>> | I'm having some trouble with Firefox, and have gotten to the phase where
>> | I decided to run a virus checker on my C: HD. My basic difficulty is
>> | what I would call herky-jerky operation. When I'm typing or scrolling,
>> | things stop for many seconds, then start. It came after a the plug from
>> | my PC accidentally pulled out. FF failed upon recovery. I put it back
>> | together by re-installing and retaining e-mail, etc. For awhile it
>> | worked fine, but then started halting as above. I did a cclean, and that
>> | got it rolling again, only for the problem to return within 10 or so hours.

>> | I did a diagnostic on the HD and it passed. I then began to try a virus
>> | check with AVG, which I have never used before. I have question about
>> | what it report. If I knew of a web site to temporarily post images of
>> | the vault, I'd post it.

>> | I posted the following in the FF support group.
>> | ...

>> | My virus scan with AVG proved very interesting. It found several
>> | infections, three were trojans, several tracking cookies (associated
>> | with FF and probably SeaMonkey, and a worm in
>> | Doc&Settings/.../dialsys.exe. I took care of them. They are now in the
>> | vault. That was all last evening.

>> | Some hours of the scan I sat down at the PC to find AVG Resident Shield
>> | had found two more Trojan Horses. Correcting thes matters last night
>> | provided no change in the problem with FF that I reported.

>> | What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
>> | Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them. By
>> | the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
>> | almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
>> | is certainly different.

>> | Well, I'll continue to trouble shoot today as I can. Right now I'm just
>> | using SeaMonkey.

>> Please add to your scan, Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware
>> 

>> PS: I doubt that AVG is "too sensitive" nor finding False Positives.

| On what basis do you think I should try another virus checker. A five
| star review somewhere?

| What I'm suggesting is there's a potential for some bias for sales
| purposes. That's not necessarily directed at AVG. Is there a standards
| committee on viruses, worms, etc.?

You are confused.

Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware (MBAM) is not an anti virus. That is AVG. MBAM handles non
viral malware and you in your own words have indicated AVG found several trojans.

AT&T and Yahoo do NOT write anti malware software. At best what you have is an OEM
product. The question is WHO is actually the vendor ?

MBAM is a very good anti malware utility and is free to use to remove malware.

Surely you jest about a standards comittee on malware. Do you really think malware
authors will conform to a standard ?

--
Dave

Multi-AV -

W. eWatson · Sep 3, 2009

David H. Lipman wrote:
> From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>
>
> | David H. Lipman wrote:
>>> From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>
> 
>>> | I'm having some trouble with Firefox, and have gotten to the phase where
>>> | I decided to run a virus checker on my C: HD. My basic difficulty is
>>> | what I would call herky-jerky operation. When I'm typing or scrolling,
>>> | things stop for many seconds, then start. It came after a the plug from
>>> | my PC accidentally pulled out. FF failed upon recovery. I put it back
>>> | together by re-installing and retaining e-mail, etc. For awhile it
>>> | worked fine, but then started halting as above. I did a cclean, and that
>>> | got it rolling again, only for the problem to return within 10 or so hours.
> 
>>> | I did a diagnostic on the HD and it passed. I then began to try a virus
>>> | check with AVG, which I have never used before. I have question about
>>> | what it report. If I knew of a web site to temporarily post images of
>>> | the vault, I'd post it.
> 
>>> | I posted the following in the FF support group.
>>> | ...
> 
>>> | My virus scan with AVG proved very interesting. It found several
>>> | infections, three were trojans, several tracking cookies (associated
>>> | with FF and probably SeaMonkey, and a worm in
>>> | Doc&Settings/.../dialsys.exe. I took care of them. They are now in the
>>> | vault. That was all last evening.
> 
>>> | Some hours of the scan I sat down at the PC to find AVG Resident Shield
>>> | had found two more Trojan Horses. Correcting thes matters last night
>>> | provided no change in the problem with FF that I reported.
> 
>>> | What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
>>> | Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them. By
>>> | the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
>>> | almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
>>> | is certainly different.
> 
>>> | Well, I'll continue to trouble shoot today as I can. Right now I'm just
>>> | using SeaMonkey.
> 
>>> Please add to your scan, Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware
>>> 
> 
>>> PS: I doubt that AVG is "too sensitive" nor finding False Positives.
>
> | On what basis do you think I should try another virus checker. A five
> | star review somewhere?
>
> | What I'm suggesting is there's a potential for some bias for sales
> | purposes. That's not necessarily directed at AVG. Is there a standards
> | committee on viruses, worms, etc.?
>
> You are confused.
A natural state. And an example of non-viral malware is what?
>
> Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware (MBAM) is not an anti virus. That is AVG. MBAM handles non
> viral malware and you in your own words have indicated AVG found several trojans.
>
> AT&T and Yahoo do NOT write anti malware software. At best what you have is an OEM
> product. The question is WHO is actually the vendor ?
Of course not. Did I say they did? Whatever they use to protect e-mail
and firewalls is likely written by someone else. They do provide such
protection, right?
>
> MBAM is a very good anti malware utility and is free to use to remove malware.
>
> Surely you jest about a standards comittee on malware. Do you really think malware
> authors will conform to a standard ?
Shirley, I do to some extent. The question I pose is there a standard
for what might generally called infections? You know, something that
puts everyone on the same footing (s/w developers of infectious s/w), so
that they don't slip in some crazy thing to demonstrate they are better
than the other guys?

I don't think it's an unfair question to ask who rates infection
preventive software? Is PC magazine the arbiter.
>
> 
But let's not get confused here on side issues. The real question is
interpreting the AVG messages. Can someone take a look at the messages
via a temporary web site that I can post images to of the vault contents?

W. eWatson · Sep 3, 2009

Leythos wrote:
> In article <h7n8b1$dd8$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> wolftracks@invalid.com says...
>> I'm having some trouble with Firefox, and have gotten to the phase where
>> I decided to run a virus checker on my C: HD. My basic difficulty is
>> what I would call herky-jerky operation. When I'm typing or scrolling,
>> things stop for many seconds, then start. It came after a the plug from
>> my PC accidentally pulled out. FF failed upon recovery. I put it back
>> together by re-installing and retaining e-mail, etc. For awhile it
>> worked fine, but then started halting as above. I did a cclean, and that
>> got it rolling again, only for the problem to return within 10 or so hours.
>>
>> I did a diagnostic on the HD and it passed. I then began to try a virus
>> check with AVG, which I have never used before. I have question about
>> what it report. If I knew of a web site to temporarily post images of
>> the vault, I'd post it.
>>
>> I posted the following in the FF support group.
>> ...
>>
>> My virus scan with AVG proved very interesting. It found several
>> infections, three were trojans, several tracking cookies (associated
>> with FF and probably SeaMonkey, and a worm in
>> Doc&Settings/.../dialsys.exe. I took care of them. They are now in the
>> vault. That was all last evening.
>>
>> Some hours of the scan I sat down at the PC to find AVG Resident Shield
>> had found two more Trojan Horses. Correcting thes matters last night
>> provided no change in the problem with FF that I reported.
>>
>> What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
>> Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them. By
>> the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
>> almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
>> is certainly different.
>>
>> Well, I'll continue to trouble shoot today as I can. Right now I'm just
>> using SeaMonkey.
>
> You need something better than AVG, my experience with hundreds of
> computers using AVG is that it's one of the least protective out on the
> market.
> 
Can you back that up with specific reviews that it rate it poorer than
others? What do you do that requires hundreds of computers? What would
you suggest that's free and better?

David H. Lipman · Sep 3, 2009

From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>

| Can you back that up with specific reviews that it rate it poorer than
| others? What do you do that requires hundreds of computers? What would
| you suggest that's free and better?

{ Why does EVERYONE have to lean towards a free AV ? I don't know.... }

The answer is Avira AntiVir -

--
Dave

Multi-AV -

Leythos · Sep 3, 2009

In article <h7pmfl$nn7$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
wolftracks@invalid.com says...
>
> Leythos wrote:
> > In article <h7n8b1$dd8$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > wolftracks@invalid.com says...
> >> I'm having some trouble with Firefox, and have gotten to the phase where
> >> I decided to run a virus checker on my C: HD. My basic difficulty is
> >> what I would call herky-jerky operation. When I'm typing or scrolling,
> >> things stop for many seconds, then start. It came after a the plug from
> >> my PC accidentally pulled out. FF failed upon recovery. I put it back
> >> together by re-installing and retaining e-mail, etc. For awhile it
> >> worked fine, but then started halting as above. I did a cclean, and that
> >> got it rolling again, only for the problem to return within 10 or so hours.
> >>
> >> I did a diagnostic on the HD and it passed. I then began to try a virus
> >> check with AVG, which I have never used before. I have question about
> >> what it report. If I knew of a web site to temporarily post images of
> >> the vault, I'd post it.
> >>
> >> I posted the following in the FF support group.
> >> ...
> >>
> >> My virus scan with AVG proved very interesting. It found several
> >> infections, three were trojans, several tracking cookies (associated
> >> with FF and probably SeaMonkey, and a worm in
> >> Doc&Settings/.../dialsys.exe. I took care of them. They are now in the
> >> vault. That was all last evening.
> >>
> >> Some hours of the scan I sat down at the PC to find AVG Resident Shield
> >> had found two more Trojan Horses. Correcting thes matters last night
> >> provided no change in the problem with FF that I reported.
> >>
> >> What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
> >> Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them. By
> >> the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
> >> almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
> >> is certainly different.
> >>
> >> Well, I'll continue to trouble shoot today as I can. Right now I'm just
> >> using SeaMonkey.
> >
> > You need something better than AVG, my experience with hundreds of
> > computers using AVG is that it's one of the least protective out on the
> > market.
> > 
> Can you back that up with specific reviews that it rate it poorer than
> others? What do you do that requires hundreds of computers? What would
> you suggest that's free and better?

I back my statement with 20+ years of experience in securing systems
against threats, and never having had a compromised managed network that
we maintain for customers.

The AVG failures were at Sororities over 2 years as well as many
residential systems from different types of users - The most infected
machines were running AVG, the second most were using McAfee products,
the least infected machines were running Symantec Corporate AV and CA
products.

One thing to note - the least infected machines also included ones
properly secured as per Microsoft's directions that have been available
for many years.

I don't suggest ANY free AV products, my time and data is valuable
enough to PAY for better protection - if you spend 1 hour cleaning your
machine of malware, and another hour just making sure it's not infected
with KNOWN malware, you've paid for the cost of better protection.

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

Max Wachtel · Sep 3, 2009

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 22:06:29 -0400, W. eWatson <wolftracks@invalid.com>
wrote:

> I'm having some trouble with Firefox, and have gotten to the phase where
> I decided to run a virus checker on my C: HD. My basic difficulty is

You should be running weekly scans with both your Anti-Virus and
Anti-Spyware

> what I would call herky-jerky operation. When I'm typing or scrolling,
> things stop for many seconds, then start. It came after a the plug from

There could be a mechanical problem.

> my PC accidentally pulled out. FF failed upon recovery. I put it back
> together by re-installing and retaining e-mail, etc. For awhile it
> worked fine, but then started halting as above. I did a cclean, and that

what the hell is a "cclean"???

> got it rolling again, only for the problem to return within 10 or so
> hours.
>
> I did a diagnostic on the HD and it passed. I then began to try a virus
> check with AVG, which I have never used before. I have question about
> what it report. If I knew of a web site to temporarily post images of
> the vault, I'd post it.
>
Perhaps you should check the memory too.


> I posted the following in the FF support group.
> ...
>
> My virus scan with AVG proved very interesting. It found several
> infections, three were trojans, several tracking cookies (associated
> with FF and probably SeaMonkey, and a worm in
> Doc&Settings/.../dialsys.exe. I took care of them. They are now in the
> vault. That was all last evening.
>
> Some hours of the scan I sat down at the PC to find AVG Resident Shield
> had found two more Trojan Horses. Correcting thes matters last night
> provided no change in the problem with FF that I reported.
>
Download David Lipman's Multi-AV tool,run all modules and see what they
report. Also grab SUPERAntiSpyware and the MBAM tool and see what they
have to say. If I were you, I would make backups of all important files,
pics,music etc. and prepare for a format/install. Go get yourself a disk
imaging tool and learn how to use it. Create a clean image so if you get
yourself in trouble you can just restore from a "known clean image" in a
few min.

> What's quite surprising to me is the "infections". Apparently, AT&T
> Yahoo s/w isn't doing its job, or AVG is much too sensitive to them. By
> the latter, I mean are these infections dead on arrival anyway? In
> almost a decade of internet use, I've contracted maybe 3 viruses. This
> is certainly different.

You need a refresher on maintaining your PC. They don't call it the WWW
for nothing!
--
My Pages:
Virus Removal
Keep Clean
Tools

W. eWatson · Sep 4, 2009

David H. Lipman wrote:
> From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>
>
> | Can you back that up with specific reviews that it rate it poorer than
> | others? What do you do that requires hundreds of computers? What would
> | you suggest that's free and better?
>
> { Why does EVERYONE have to lean towards a free AV ? I don't know.... }
>
> The answer is Avira AntiVir -
>
> 
A question remains. What is wrong with AT&T/Yahoo's protection? I can
assure you that I do not run around looking for oddball exe files to
download and open.

If no one knows, I think I'll ask them.

1PW · Sep 4, 2009

W. eWatson wrote:
> David H. Lipman wrote:
>> From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>
>>
>> | Can you back that up with specific reviews that it rate it poorer than
>> | others? What do you do that requires hundreds of computers? What would
>> | you suggest that's free and better?
>>
>> { Why does EVERYONE have to lean towards a free AV ? I don't know.... }
>>
>> The answer is Avira AntiVir -
>>
>>
> A question remains. What is wrong with AT&T/Yahoo's protection? 

What protection? To what depth do you expect your ISP to protect you?
Why do think we strongly suggest you run a good NAT router, maintain
a good personal firewall, and the best AV and even several antispyware
applications, plus good current backups?

> I can assure you that I do not run around looking for oddball exe files to
> download and open.

But if you fail to have a well maintained/protected system, you might
as well be...

My apologies to you if I missed it in your previous posts. What is
the exact output from the "winver" command on your system?

> If no one knows, I think I'll ask them.

Please repeat to us, in this thread, what you are told by them. I
believe it will be quite interesting and perhaps quite a wake-up call
for some.

Respectfully,

--
1PW

W. eWatson · Sep 4, 2009

1PW wrote:
> W. eWatson wrote:
>> David H. Lipman wrote:
>>> From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>
>>>
>>> | Can you back that up with specific reviews that it rate it poorer than
>>> | others? What do you do that requires hundreds of computers? What would
>>> | you suggest that's free and better?
>>>
>>> { Why does EVERYONE have to lean towards a free AV ? I don't know.... }
>>>
>>> The answer is Avira AntiVir -
>>>
>>>
>> A question remains. What is wrong with AT&T/Yahoo's protection? 
>
> What protection? To what depth do you expect your ISP to protect you?
> Why do think we strongly suggest you run a good NAT router, maintain
> a good personal firewall, and the best AV and even several antispyware
> applications, plus good current backups?

I expected total protection, but as I just learned from their tech
support that's not necessarily true. One weakness is that I receive my
mail via Thunderbird. No virus check is performed, but I'm extremely
careful about opening messages from people I do not know. Their firewall
via DSL seems sound. Another potential weakness is visiting web sites.
First, the tech guy said basically you are on your own, but then clued
me into their Security Suite, which I'm now downloading, and will
install shortly. It does offer web site protection. See * below. BTW,
they use McCaffee for security.

Nevertheless, respondents here have consistently drifted off the main
reason for my post. Interpreting the msgs from AVG. I had no reason to
use it other than make a quick check on my system. Everyone seems
determined to provide responses to every thing but my main request.
There is one infection that AVG tells me that it cannot quarantine.
That's important to understand. If you want to discuss more here, that's
fine, but how about dealing with the AVG msgs, and in particular the one
just mentioned. The game is wide open as to what I do next regarding
additional infection software and firewalls.

winver? OK, that's a tall order, since that's a lot to type. Here are
the basics. Win XP PRO, Vers 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2 etc. for Service
Pack 2). 1.572 G of memory.

* From their web site:
McAfee® VirusScan® Plus offers proactive PC security to prevent
malicious attacks, so you can protect what you value as well as surf,
search, and download files online with confidence. McAfee SiteAdvisor's
Web safety ratings, help you avoid unsafe Web sites. This service also
provides security against multi-pronged attacks by combining anti-virus,
anti-spyware and firewall technologies. McAfee's security service
continuously delivers the latest software so your protection is never
out-of-date. You can now easily add and manage security for multiple PCs
in your home. Moreover, improved performance allows it to protect,
without disturbing you.

Cheers.
> 
>> I can assure you that I do not run around looking for oddball exe files to
>> download and open.
>
> But if you fail to have a well maintained/protected system, you might
> as well be...
>
> My apologies to you if I missed it in your previous posts. What is
> the exact output from the "winver" command on your system?
> 
>> If no one knows, I think I'll ask them.
>
> Please repeat to us, in this thread, what you are told by them. I
> believe it will be quite interesting and perhaps quite a wake-up call
> for some.
>
> Respectfully,
>

David H. Lipman · Sep 4, 2009

From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>

| 1PW wrote:
>> W. eWatson wrote:
>>> David H. Lipman wrote:
>>>> From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>

>>>> | Can you back that up with specific reviews that it rate it poorer than
>>>> | others? What do you do that requires hundreds of computers? What would
>>>> | you suggest that's free and better?

>>>> { Why does EVERYONE have to lean towards a free AV ? I don't know.... }

>>>> The answer is Avira AntiVir - 


>>> A question remains. What is wrong with AT&T/Yahoo's protection?

>> What protection? To what depth do you expect your ISP to protect you?
>> Why do think we strongly suggest you run a good NAT router, maintain
>> a good personal firewall, and the best AV and even several antispyware
>> applications, plus good current backups?

| I expected total protection, but as I just learned from their tech
| support that's not necessarily true. One weakness is that I receive my
| mail via Thunderbird. No virus check is performed, but I'm extremely
| careful about opening messages from people I do not know. Their firewall
| via DSL seems sound. Another potential weakness is visiting web sites.
| First, the tech guy said basically you are on your own, but then clued
| me into their Security Suite, which I'm now downloading, and will
| install shortly. It does offer web site protection. See * below. BTW,
| they use McCaffee for security.

| Nevertheless, respondents here have consistently drifted off the main
| reason for my post. Interpreting the msgs from AVG. I had no reason to
| use it other than make a quick check on my system. Everyone seems
| determined to provide responses to every thing but my main request.
| There is one infection that AVG tells me that it cannot quarantine.
| That's important to understand. If you want to discuss more here, that's
| fine, but how about dealing with the AVG msgs, and in particular the one
| just mentioned. The game is wide open as to what I do next regarding
| additional infection software and firewalls.

| winver? OK, that's a tall order, since that's a lot to type. Here are
| the basics. Win XP PRO, Vers 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2 etc. for Service
| Pack 2). 1.572 G of memory.

| * From their web site:
| McAfee® VirusScan® Plus offers proactive PC security to prevent
| malicious attacks, so you can protect what you value as well as surf,
| search, and download files online with confidence. McAfee SiteAdvisor's
| Web safety ratings, help you avoid unsafe Web sites. This service also
| provides security against multi-pronged attacks by combining anti-virus,
| anti-spyware and firewall technologies. McAfee's security service
| continuously delivers the latest software so your protection is never
| out-of-date. You can now easily add and manage security for multiple PCs
| in your home. Moreover, improved performance allows it to protect,
| without disturbing you.

| Cheers.

I like McAfee Enterprise software.
McAfee's retail software (and OEM) SUCK !

Have you installed and scanned with MBAM yet ?

--
Dave

Multi-AV -

FromTheRafters · Sep 4, 2009

"W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:h7qrsc$i3r$1@news.eternal-september.org...

> A question remains. What is wrong with AT&T/Yahoo's protection? I can
> assure you that I do not run around looking for oddball exe files to
> download and open.
>
> If no one knows, I think I'll ask them.

No matter what somebody else does on their computer(s) to combat the
spread of malware to you, you still need *antivirus* software to run
locally. Some folks substitute strict safe practices with antimalware
applications, mostly to clean up after themselves post infestation, but
also resident protection mechanisms to 'save their bacon' whilst they
ignore safe practices.

So, nothing may be *wrong* with their filtering. It will ultimately be
your responsibility to protect yourself either way.

FromTheRafters · Sep 4, 2009

"W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:h7rn5p$4o1$1@news.eternal-september.org...

> ... but I'm extremely careful about opening messages from people I do
> not know.

Common misconception.

Chances are good (perhaps better?) that an infestation can come from
someone you *do* know.

W. eWatson · Sep 5, 2009

FromTheRafters wrote:
> "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:h7qrsc$i3r$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> 
>> A question remains. What is wrong with AT&T/Yahoo's protection? I can
>> assure you that I do not run around looking for oddball exe files to
>> download and open.
>>
>> If no one knows, I think I'll ask them.
>
> No matter what somebody else does on their computer(s) to combat the
> spread of malware to you, you still need *antivirus* software to run
> locally. Some folks substitute strict safe practices with antimalware
> applications, mostly to clean up after themselves post infestation, but
> also resident protection mechanisms to 'save their bacon' whilst they
> ignore safe practices.
>
> So, nothing may be *wrong* with their filtering. It will ultimately be
> your responsibility to protect yourself either way.
>
> 
I think my post suggests that. Nevertheless, the absence of any such
statement by AT&T almost suggests they are giving one full protection.
They seem to be making a good attempt at it. I haven't yet added their
Security Monitor, Suite, Monitor ... whatever they call it.
Interestingly, I had started to install it, and realized I didn't have
time to do it, so began to cancel. I received a msg that I would have
download it again if I did. I guess that's smart so as not to somehow
avoid some infection. Nothing disturbing, just never had that happen
during a download, for example, Google Earth.

W. eWatson · Sep 5, 2009

FromTheRafters wrote:
> "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:h7rn5p$4o1$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> 
>> ... but I'm extremely careful about opening messages from people I do
>> not know.
>
> Common misconception.
>
> Chances are good (perhaps better?) that an infestation can come from
> someone you *do* know.
>
>
> 
I certainly had that happen, once in 10 years or more of using the
internet. He finally figured it out after I traced it back to him. I was
getting bombarded by 100-200 msgs per day. I've had no more than 6
infections during that time, and only recently under AT*T exceeded that
by two.

1PW · Sep 5, 2009

W. eWatson wrote:
> 1PW wrote:
>> W. eWatson wrote:
>>> David H. Lipman wrote:
>>>> From: "W. eWatson" <wolftracks@invalid.com>
>>>>
>>>> | Can you back that up with specific reviews that it rate it poorer
>>>> than
>>>> | others? What do you do that requires hundreds of computers? What
>>>> would
>>>> | you suggest that's free and better?
>>>>
>>>> { Why does EVERYONE have to lean towards a free AV ? I don't
>>>> know.... }
>>>>
>>>> The answer is Avira AntiVir -
>>>>
>>>>
>>> A question remains. What is wrong with AT&T/Yahoo's protection? 
>>
>> What protection? To what depth do you expect your ISP to protect you?
>> Why do think we strongly suggest you run a good NAT router, maintain
>> a good personal firewall, and the best AV and even several antispyware
>> applications, plus good current backups?
>
> I expected total protection, but as I just learned from their tech
> support that's not necessarily true. 

That's certainly a gross understatement I'm afraid.

> One weakness is that I receive my
> mail via Thunderbird. 

When I last looked, you were at 2.0.0.23 - that part is OK.

> No virus check is performed, but I'm extremely
> careful about opening messages from people I do not know. 

It's highly probable that your ISP /is/ doing a malware check. How
thorough is debatable though. However it could be adequate. As may
have been pointed out by others, what you download from those you know
can be just as dangerous.

> Their firewall
> via DSL seems sound. 

Unless you own or lease your /hardware/ firewall from your ISP the
your protection is probably mostly imagined. Probably only a
minuscule few ports are blocked. Sorry!

> Another potential weakness is visiting web sites.
> First, the tech guy said basically you are on your own, but then clued
> me into their Security Suite, which I'm now downloading, and will
> install shortly. It does offer web site protection. See * below. BTW,
> they use McAfee for security.

Although the assessment of being on your own is quite accurate, your
following move was ill advised. At least you'll be able to uninstall
the McAfee software once you've learned your lesson. And now, won't
you have two different antivirus engines going? This too is not
advised. Yes - they probably "give" away the McAfee software for free.

I should have asked earlier - who is your ISP?

Again, I apologize for the harsh tone of my statement. I'm fairly
sure you want reputable information though.

> Nevertheless, respondents here have consistently drifted off the main
> reason for my post. 

We are a full service newsgroup!

> Interpreting the msgs from AVG. I had no reason to
> use it other than make a quick check on my system. Everyone seems
> determined to provide responses to every thing but my main request.
> There is one infection that AVG tells me that it cannot quarantine.
> That's important to understand. If you want to discuss more here, that's
> fine, but how about dealing with the AVG msgs, and in particular the one
> just mentioned. 

Although many here do run AVG, it seems nobody has experienced what
you see or they aren't coming forward. Hence, I'd suggest you lurk or
join the AVG forum:

<http://forums.avg.com/>

> The game is wide open as to what I do next regarding
> additional infection software and firewalls.
>
> winver? OK, that's a tall order, since that's a lot to type. Here are
> the basics. Win XP PRO, Vers 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2 etc. for Service
> Pack 2). 1.572 G of memory.

What might be keeping you from updating to service pack 3 and all its
subsequent fixes? Your amount of ram is good.

> * From their web site:
> McAfee® VirusScan® Plus offers proactive PC security to prevent
> malicious attacks, so you can protect what you value as well as surf,
> search, and download files online with confidence. McAfee SiteAdvisor's
> Web safety ratings, help you avoid unsafe Web sites. This service also
> provides security against multi-pronged attacks by combining anti-virus,
> anti-spyware and firewall technologies. McAfee's security service
> continuously delivers the latest software so your protection is never
> out-of-date. You can now easily add and manage security for multiple PCs
> in your home. Moreover, improved performance allows it to protect,
> without disturbing you.

Let us know when you've had enough of McAfee and we'll try to help you
out.

> Cheers.
>>
>>> I can assure you that I do not run around looking for oddball exe
>>> files to
>>> download and open.
>>
>> But if you fail to have a well maintained/protected system, you might
>> as well be...
>>
>> My apologies to you if I missed it in your previous posts. What is
>> the exact output from the "winver" command on your system?
>>
>>> If no one knows, I think I'll ask them.
>>
>> Please repeat to us, in this thread, what you are told by them. I
>> believe it will be quite interesting and perhaps quite a wake-up call
>> for some.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>>

Best wishes to you.

--
1PW

Log in or Sign up

Firefox, AVG, and Infections

W. eWatson Guest

David H. Lipman Guest

W. eWatson Guest

FromTheRafters Guest

Leythos Guest

David H. Lipman Guest

W. eWatson Guest

W. eWatson Guest

David H. Lipman Guest

Leythos Guest

Max Wachtel Guest

W. eWatson Guest

1PW Guest

W. eWatson Guest

David H. Lipman Guest

FromTheRafters Guest

FromTheRafters Guest

W. eWatson Guest

W. eWatson Guest

1PW Guest

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Firefox, AVG, and Infections

W. eWatson Guest

David H. Lipman Guest

W. eWatson Guest

FromTheRafters Guest

Leythos Guest

David H. Lipman Guest

W. eWatson Guest

W. eWatson Guest

David H. Lipman Guest

Leythos Guest

Max Wachtel Guest

W. eWatson Guest

1PW Guest

W. eWatson Guest

David H. Lipman Guest

FromTheRafters Guest

FromTheRafters Guest

W. eWatson Guest

W. eWatson Guest

1PW Guest

Share This Page

Useful Searches