Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not...

[Guest MEB]

Approximately 800 vulnerabilities discovered in Anti-Virus products

 

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=1445&tag=nl.e539

 

Seems the parsing issue has again been addressed as a potential area of

vulnerability.

 

"... the IT/Security consulting firm n.runs AG claims to have discovered

approximately 800 vulnerabilities within antivirus products based on

exploiting a standard malware scanning process known as "parsing" :"

It isn't reasonable to shuffle this off with the standard "oh just another

business pointing out others failures",

 

*"The research they cite is based on Secunia's tracking of advisories

affecting antivirus products, as well as research conducted by the

University of Michigan emphasizing on the severity of the vulnerabilities on

a per product basis."*

 

Might want to see what the rating of your Anti-Virus application is.

 

Another comparative is located here:

http://www.av-comparatives.org/

 

And a May 2008 results:

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2008_05.php

 

--

MEB

http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

--

_________

[Guest 98 Guy]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not...

 

MEB wrote:

> Approximately 800 vulnerabilities discovered in Anti-Virus products

 

I've been saying (for more than a year) that AV software, along with

running a software firewall, was basically useless on win-98 systems.

[Guest MEB]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not...

 

In news:487438D3.C2F56B33@Guy.com at ,

98 Guy contemplated and posted:

| MEB wrote:

|

|> Approximately 800 vulnerabilities discovered in Anti-Virus products

|

| I've been saying (for more than a year) that AV software, along with

| running a software firewall, was basically useless on win-98 systems.

 

Well, let me guess, YOU think NT systems are safer.... the POINT is the

systems and software are vulnerable.. that's ALL of them, some more than

others. HOWEVER, not running Anti-Virus software makes you just another

infecter of others... passing the stuff around and never knowing..

What, you think there are no more viruses on the NET,, no more BackOrifice,

no more exe hacks ...

 

And a firewall helps to montor that software... something no hardware can

do...

 

So what's better??? Hmmm....

 

--

MEB

http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

--

_________

[Guest Bill in Co.]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not...

 

MEB wrote:

> In news:487438D3.C2F56B33@Guy.com at ,

> 98 Guy contemplated and posted:

>> MEB wrote:

>>

>>> Approximately 800 vulnerabilities discovered in Anti-Virus products

>>

>> I've been saying (for more than a year) that AV software, along with

>> running a software firewall, was basically useless on win-98 systems.

>

> Well, let me guess, YOU think NT systems are safer.... the POINT is the

> systems and software are vulnerable.. that's ALL of them, some more than

> others. HOWEVER, not running Anti-Virus software makes you just another

> infecter of others... passing the stuff around and never knowing..

> What, you think there are no more viruses on the NET,, no more

> BackOrifice,

> no more exe hacks ...

>

> And a firewall helps to montor that software... something no hardware can

> do...

>

> So what's better??? Hmmm....

 

DOS.

[Guest Dan]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

<grin> This is why 9x systems were so successful is because they had DOS as

the underlying maintenance operating system. I really enjoy Chris Quirke's

views on this with the safety of 9x operating systems compared to the

security of NT operating systems.

 

"Bill in Co." wrote:

> MEB wrote:

> > In news:487438D3.C2F56B33@Guy.com at ,

> > 98 Guy contemplated and posted:

> >> MEB wrote:

> >>

> >>> Approximately 800 vulnerabilities discovered in Anti-Virus products

> >>

> >> I've been saying (for more than a year) that AV software, along with

> >> running a software firewall, was basically useless on win-98 systems.

> >

> > Well, let me guess, YOU think NT systems are safer.... the POINT is the

> > systems and software are vulnerable.. that's ALL of them, some more than

> > others. HOWEVER, not running Anti-Virus software makes you just another

> > infecter of others... passing the stuff around and never knowing..

> > What, you think there are no more viruses on the NET,, no more

> > BackOrifice,

> > no more exe hacks ...

> >

> > And a firewall helps to montor that software... something no hardware can

> > do...

> >

> > So what's better??? Hmmm....

>

> DOS.

>

>

>

[Guest Gary S. Terhune]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not...

 

Wrong. DOS is no less vulnerable to viruses than Windows.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://grystmill.com

 

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:uqel3HY4IHA.3784@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> MEB wrote:

>> In news:487438D3.C2F56B33@Guy.com at ,

>> 98 Guy contemplated and posted:

>>> MEB wrote:

>>>

>>>> Approximately 800 vulnerabilities discovered in Anti-Virus products

>>>

>>> I've been saying (for more than a year) that AV software, along with

>>> running a software firewall, was basically useless on win-98 systems.

>>

>> Well, let me guess, YOU think NT systems are safer.... the POINT is the

>> systems and software are vulnerable.. that's ALL of them, some more than

>> others. HOWEVER, not running Anti-Virus software makes you just another

>> infecter of others... passing the stuff around and never knowing..

>> What, you think there are no more viruses on the NET,, no more

>> BackOrifice,

>> no more exe hacks ...

>>

>> And a firewall helps to montor that software... something no hardware can

>> do...

>>

>> So what's better??? Hmmm....

>

> DOS.

>

[Guest Dan]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

You are right, Gary. Perhaps I should have started a new post on the issue

since it is much more general then the subject topic.

 

I was thinking in a more general sense of hackers being able to target the

additional services that Windows XP Professional provides for users and this

allows them to target a greater surface area in looking for vulnerabilities.

In addition, if the user does not turn off remote access then that can be a

potential security hole in XP. The thing about 9x machines is that they are

standalone machines as compared to XP and Vista that big companies and

governments can more easily connect as one. As a home user, I also like the

flexibility of the machine as being my own. However, Microsoft Easy

Assistance is a great tool that allows Microsoft Technicians to help you work

on your computer with XP Professional so in my opinion each kernel type has

its advantages and disadvantages. I have heard rumors that parts of the NT

source code were leaked over the Internet and that this has not happened with

9x source code but I cannot prove this point since it is a rumor. I also

like 98 Second Edition for old-school gaming as well as its flexibility with

DOS.

 

"Gary S. Terhune" wrote:

> Wrong. DOS is no less vulnerable to viruses than Windows.

>

> --

> Gary S. Terhune

> MS-MVP Shell/User

> http://grystmill.com

>

> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

> news:uqel3HY4IHA.3784@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> > MEB wrote:

> >> In news:487438D3.C2F56B33@Guy.com at ,

> >> 98 Guy contemplated and posted:

> >>> MEB wrote:

> >>>

> >>>> Approximately 800 vulnerabilities discovered in Anti-Virus products

> >>>

> >>> I've been saying (for more than a year) that AV software, along with

> >>> running a software firewall, was basically useless on win-98 systems.

> >>

> >> Well, let me guess, YOU think NT systems are safer.... the POINT is the

> >> systems and software are vulnerable.. that's ALL of them, some more than

> >> others. HOWEVER, not running Anti-Virus software makes you just another

> >> infecter of others... passing the stuff around and never knowing..

> >> What, you think there are no more viruses on the NET,, no more

> >> BackOrifice,

> >> no more exe hacks ...

> >>

> >> And a firewall helps to montor that software... something no hardware can

> >> do...

> >>

> >> So what's better??? Hmmm....

> >

> > DOS.

> >

>

>

>

[Guest 98 Guy]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

Dan wrote:

> You are right, Gary.

 

It's always sad to see Gary's ass get kissed like this...

[Guest Lil' Dave]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

 

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48752237.6B355E12@Guy.com...

> Dan wrote:

>

>> You are right, Gary.

>

> It's always sad to see Gary's ass get kissed like this...

 

The alternative is Gary giving another public spanking :)

--

Dave

 

Speculation on a product or material that is

an obvious need, is not speculation per se

as there is no risk to the speculator.

Common were those selling food and other

supplies in the gold rush days.

In this case, its oil and its everyone who

bites the bullet. And most everyone has no gold

to be made, just business as usual.

[Guest Gary S. Terhune]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

Next on my list of people who need spankings are people who reply to idiots

that I've blocked.

 

You managed to bring two of them to the light of day. Puts you near the top

of the list, <s>.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://grystmill.com

 

"Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message

news:OIBp06n4IHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>

> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48752237.6B355E12@Guy.com...

>> Dan wrote:

>>

>>> You are right, Gary.

>>

>> It's always sad to see Gary's ass get kissed like this...

>

> The alternative is Gary giving another public spanking :)

> --

> Dave

>

> Speculation on a product or material that is

> an obvious need, is not speculation per se

> as there is no risk to the speculator.

> Common were those selling food and other

> supplies in the gold rush days.

> In this case, its oil and its everyone who

> bites the bullet. And most everyone has no gold

> to be made, just business as usual.

>

>

[Guest 98 Guy]

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

Re: Hmm, so your Anti-virus program is protecting you? Maybe not..

 

Top-poster "Gary S. Terhune" wrote:

> Next on my list of people who need spankings are people who reply

> to idiots that I've blocked.

 

As Gary sticks his head even further into the sand...