"David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
news:hrdbnh0a6n@news6.newsguy.com...
> From: "FromTheRafters" <erratic@nomail.afraid.org>
>
> | "~BD~" <BoaterDave@hotmail.co.ukk> wrote in message
> | news:etmdnSAlabunKkTWnZ2dnUVZ8qednZ2d@bt.com...
>>> OK - I'm convinced at last.
>
>>> Mbam *is* a 100% safe application!
>>> **********************************
>
>>> See post number 3 - here:-
>
>>> http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php...l=Malwarebytes
>
> | It must be a very simple application indeed to be 100% safe.
>
> | I would say that the programmers are probably 100% well intentioned.
>
> | (is McAfee 100% safe?)
>
>
>
> I truly think that logic would be above his capability.

Maybe, but I believe he is not stupid - just annoying as all hell. D

Even well intentioned programmers can introduce unsafe implementations
of ... say ... decompression algorithms, into a scanner, making zip
files or rar files into DoS trojans or worse. It has been seen before as
you know.

That 100% gets tossed around so much that one would think that it is the
"new math" that makes 100 the same as less than 100. )