Antivirus for Win98

[Henry]

What free antivrius still supports Win98 please? Avast and AVG stopped.

Thanks

Henry

[David W. Hodgins]

On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 15:56:41 -0400, Henry <wa0goz@arrl.net> wrote:

> What free antivrius still supports Win98 please? Avast and AVG stopped.

http://www.clamwin.com/
On demand scanning only though.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)

[Henry]

David W. Hodgins wrote:

> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 15:56:41 -0400, Henry <wa0goz@arrl.net> wrote:
>
>> What free antivrius still supports Win98 please? Avast and AVG stopped.
>
>
> http://www.clamwin.com/
> On demand scanning only though.
>
> Regards, Dave Hodgins
>

If I read you suggestion correctly, it isn't a real-time scanner which
is what I'm looking for.

Thanks

Henry

[siljaline]

Henry wrote:
> What free antivrius still supports Win98 please? Avast and AVG stopped.

You may use ESET anti-virus build 2.7 though it is not available for download
from the ESET download site, you may get builds elsewhere such as File Hippo.
All the FAQ's regarding this are below including the length of time you will be able
to obtain update virus signature updates.
<http://kb.eset.com/esetkb/index?page=content&id=SOLN2386>

<http://www.filehippo.com/download_nod32/history/2/>

Silj

--
"Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game
because they almost always turn out to be -- or to be indistinguishable from
-- self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time."
- Neil Stephenson, _Cryptonomicon_

[Mike Easter]

Henry wrote:
> What free antivrius still supports Win98 please? Avast and AVG stopped.

Have you considered not using a realtime AV scanner? I've done that
with Win98 without any problems.

BTW bytheway, speed without the overhead of a realtime AV is remarkably
better for the type of hardware that typically requires using W98se in
the first place.

That is, if your hardware is so retarded as to need to use Win98, then
you probably shouldn't be doing things with Win98 + (burdensome) AV.
You should be doing it some other way.

Let's back up a little bit. What exactly is the hardware that is
running this W98?


--
Mike Easter

[David W. Hodgins]

On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 00:01:59 -0400, Henry <wa0goz@arrl.net> wrote:

> David W. Hodgins wrote:
>> http://www.clamwin.com/
>> On demand scanning only though.

> If I read you suggestion correctly, it isn't a real-time scanner which
> is what I'm looking for.

Depends on how you browse the net. As long as you practice safe
hex, on demand scanning should be enough. Update the virus
definitions, and then scan any newly downloaded program you are
thinking of running. Preferably wait a few days after downloading
the program, to give them time to id new malware.

For example, make sure programs like acroread have javascript
disabled. Don't use internet explorer. Don't allow your browser
to run java, or javascript, except on sites you both trust, and
have to use those options for.

There are not that many new versions of malware that will run on
win 98.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)

[siljaline]

David W. Hodgins wrote:
> Depends on how you browse the net. As long as you practice safe
> hex, on demand scanning should be enough.

From : "10 Immutable Laws of Security"
<http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc722487.aspx>

<quote>

*Law #8: An out of date virus scanner is only marginally better than no virus scanner at all*
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virus scanners work by comparing the data on your computer against a collection of virus "signatures". Each signature is characteristic of a particular virus, and when the scanner finds data in a file, email, or elsewhere that matches the signature, it concludes that it's found a virus. However, a virus scanner can only scan for the viruses it knows about. It's vital that you keep your virus scanner's signature file up to date, as new viruses are created every day.

The problem actually goes a bit deeper than this, though. Typically, a new virus will do the greatest amount of damage during the early stages of its life, precisely because few people will be able to detect it. Once word gets around that a new virus is on the loose and people update their virus signatures, the spread of the virus falls off drastically. The key is to get ahead of the curve, and have updated signature files on your computer before the virus hits.

Virtually every maker of anti-virus software provides a way to get free updated signature files from their website. In fact, many have "push" services, in which they'll send notification every time a new signature file is released. Use these services. Also, keep the virus scanner itself—that is, the scanning software—updated as well. Virus writers periodically develop new techniques that require that the scanners change how they do their work.

</quote>

Considering Win 98 is a wide-open exploit hole, you need as best protection you can get !

Silj

--
"Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game
because they almost always turn out to be -- or to be indistinguishable from
-- self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time."
- Neil Stephenson, _Cryptonomicon_

[David W. Hodgins]

On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:30:56 -0400, siljaline <spam@uce.gov> wrote:

> David W. Hodgins wrote:
>> Depends on how you browse the net. As long as you practice safe
>> hex, on demand scanning should be enough.
>
> From : "10 Immutable Laws of Security"
> <http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc722487.aspx>
>
> <quote>
>
> *Law #8: An out of date virus scanner is only marginally better than no virus scanner at all*

Keep in mind, that I wasn't suggesting using an out of date virus
scanner.

I was suggesting, that if he's careful, an up-to-date, on demand
scanner should be adequate.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)

[siljaline]

David W. Hodgins wrote:
<snip>
> Keep in mind, that I wasn't suggesting using an out of date virus
> scanner.

I realise this.

> I was suggesting, that if he's careful, an up-to-date, on demand
> scanner should be adequate.

Since Win 98 and/or Win 98 SE includes IE6 Browser, one would want a
full time AV, an on-demand scanner would not be sufficient. I would not run
an OS with an on-demand scanner only. This is in no way secure protection.

The links and info for an AV that works on Win 98, it's up to the OP to decide.

Silj


--
"Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game
because they almost always turn out to be -- or to be indistinguishable from
-- self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time."
- Neil Stephenson, _Cryptonomicon_

[Mike Easter]

siljaline wrote:

> Since Win 98 and/or Win 98 SE includes IE6 Browser,

I strongly recommend that a W98se user not use the primitive and highly
insecure browser IE6 SP1, the most recent v. of IE6 which W98 can use.

W98se is a useful operating system for some hardware, but it needs to be
used carefully. IE6SP1 usage is not on my list of careful, and its
corresponding OE6 needs to be configured very 'tightly'.

Trying to counteract reckless behavior with an insecure OS running an
insecure browser with AV and other malware antidotes is madness.

Better to have good behavior and secure configurations and no AV than
bad behavior and insecure configuration plus all manner of antimalware.

--
Mike Easter