Clarification of a few points.

[FromTheRafters]

"~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in message
news:MMadnRc12uPyzYTTnZ2dnUVZ8oednZ2d@bt.com...

> Has *any* AV company downloaded the /whole/ anti-malware programme, just like
> any member of the public, onto a clean machine, run the programme and then
> forensically examined said machine afterwards?

There's no reason to.

Better would be to examine what it *tries* to do on *all* systems it
could possibly run on. What would happen if they tried it on XP sp3
and gave it a clean bill of health thereafter - but it was designed to
only compromise Vista?

You apparently don't understand how it all works at the lower levels.

[FromTheRafters]

"nopatients" <nopatients@outfishing.com> wrote in message
news:2eded871a8afbe062d2e6ccc564dd16d@msgid.frell. theremailer.net...
> In article <naidnfOxXf5mnIXTnZ2dnUVZ8jidnZ2d@bt.com>
> ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dustin Cook wrote:
>> > "Jenn"<nope@nowayatno.howanyday> wrote in
>> > news:iv8bdg$41n$1@dont-email.me:
>> >
>> >> Dustin wrote:
>> >>> "Jenn"<nope@nowayatno.howanyday> wrote in
>> >>> news:iv5ig4$9qd$1@dont-email.me:
>> >>>
>> >>>> ... just curious .. who's the 3rd party independent analysis done
>> >>>> by?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> I'm not going to play semantics. What I said stands.
>> >>
>> >> You said it .. I was just asking who you were talking about...
>> >> don't you know?
>> >
>> > Yep. I know. Jenn, the Malwarebytes software is routinely tested by virus
>> > scanners when people submit the executable; Like you did with David
>> > Lipmans program. That is independent, 3rd party. [g] A clean bill of
>> > health is always provided.
>>
>>
>> That answer is inadequate and does not answer the original question.
>>
>> <q/p>
>>
>> Rootkit detection is difficult because a rootkit may be able to subvert
>> the software that is intended to find it. Detection methods include
>> using an alternate, trusted operating system; behavioral-based methods;
>> signature scanning; difference scanning; and memory dump analysis.
>> Removal can be complicated or practically impossible, especially in
>> cases where the rootkit resides in the kernel; reinstallation of the
>> operating system may be the only alternative.
>>
>> <q>
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rootkit
>>
>> Do you dispute this, Dustin?
>>
>> So, I repeat my question. Which independent body has actually checked
>> the software in the manner I suggested earlier? i.e. Downloaded the
>> software onto a known clean computer and then forensically examined said
>> machine.
>
> Run a real operating system and you won't have those problems.

This group has just exceeded the maximum allowed stupid poster
threshold, please avoid posting until some other stupid poster
leaves the group.

Thank you very much for your cooperation.

[~BD~]

FromTheRafters wrote:
> "~BD~"<~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in message
> news:MMadnRc12uPyzYTTnZ2dnUVZ8oednZ2d@bt.com...
>
>> Has *any* AV company downloaded the /whole/ anti-malware programme, just like
>> any member of the public, onto a clean machine, run the programme and then
>> forensically examined said machine afterwards?
>
> There's no reason to.

Odd that BTS says that the NSA *has* done so. http://www.nsa.gov/

> Better would be to examine what it *tries* to do on *all* systems it
> could possibly run on. What would happen if they tried it on XP sp3
> and gave it a clean bill of health thereafter - but it was designed to
> only compromise Vista?
>
> You apparently don't understand how it all works at the lower levels.

I'm not a computer buff like you FTR. I'm simply a user, not a techie!

That's the very reason I like to bounce things off you (in particular).

I believe I /have/ thanked you - for helping me - too! ;-)

[Dustin]

"FromTheRafters" <erratic.howard@gmail.com> wrote in
news:ivd7g1$bt8$1@dont-email.me:

> You apparently don't understand how it all works at the lower
> levels.

Apparently? heh.. I've said that for sometime now... He really does think
this is all magical.


--
(Hey) I keep on thinking that it's
(Hey) all done and all over now (whoa)
You keep on thinking you can save me save me
(Hey) My ship is sinking but it's
(Hey) all good and I can go down (whoa)
You've got me thinking that the party's all over

[Dustin]

~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in
news:3emdnWr0buiFgYfTnZ2dnUVZ8gGdnZ2d@bt.com:

> Tell me Dustin - why doesn't MBAM have a version to protect Apple OS
> X?

You should post that question in the forum.

> Or Linux variants for that matter?

See above.

> Oh yes. If I *do* decide to buy Malwarebytes for my /Windows/
> computers, will I be permitted to post on the MBAM forums
> (officially) again? I'd like to know! TIA

I wouldn't know David. Your banning had nothing to do with your usage of
the software. I don't think you'll be unbanned anytime soon. I wouldn't
put in a good word for you. hehehe, and you know what's so funny? You'd
probably HAVE TO have that before you'd have a shot in hell. Nice huh?


--
(Hey) I keep on thinking that it's
(Hey) all done and all over now (whoa)
You keep on thinking you can save me save me
(Hey) My ship is sinking but it's
(Hey) all good and I can go down (whoa)
You've got me thinking that the party's all over

[Aardvark]

On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 13:34:25 -0400, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

> Let's face it: you have a slimy agenda towards MalwareBytes because they
> kicked you out of their forum. You're a disruptive slimeball.

IAWTP



--
"Those who do not make human beings the center of their concern soon
lose the capacity to make any ethical choices, for they willingly
sacrifice others in the name of the politically expedient and
practical." - Dwight Macdonald, “The Root Is Man.”

[Dustin]

~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in
news:4YqdnYh4WLWrhIfTnZ2dnUVZ8hWdnZ2d@bt.com:

> Dustin wrote:
>> ~BD~<~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in
>> news:nOmdnd_PCvsrY4TTnZ2dnUVZ8uGdnZ2d@bt.com:
>>
>>> Dustin wrote:
>>>> ~BD~<~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in
>>>> news:RY2dncW7L81vZYTTnZ2dnUVZ7o- dnZ2d@bt.com:
>>>>
>>>>> Dustin wrote:
>>>>>> Do you want to go ahead and write a formal apology now?
>>>>>
>>>>> To whom - and for what reason?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well,
>>>>
>>>> you can write one to malwarebytes for trying to slime their
>>>> excellent product. It's been peer reviewed to hell and back,
>>>> nothing bad ever found. A stand up fellow as you want people to
>>>> think you are, shouldn't have any trouble admitting he was wrong
>>>> about them and apologizing here in public for the comments and
>>>> innuendo remarks towards their fine program.
>>>>
>>>> You can then write one to me, for trying to provide a streetmap
>>>> view of my house, and for trying to insinuate that I was lying
>>>> about malwarebytes in any possible fashion. You may also apologize
>>>> for trying to imply I was in any way directly associated with the
>>>> piratebay.
>>>>
>>>> You do these things, and make it convincing, and perhaps the
>>>> remailer wont' drop the dime on you, but I make no promises as you
>>>> have tried to hurt a lot of people and I'm on the fence as to
>>>> whether or not it would be grey area or blackhat to help them make
>>>> things right.
>>>
>>> Your comments have been noted.
>>>
>>> D.
>>
>> It's the only chance you have David and it's not a lifetime offer.
You
>> think on it and I'll be lurking.
>
> Maybe you'll respond like this again - will you?
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.2...eeb450ab?hl=en

Nice, I wasn't aware it was trollishly crossposted to alt.2600.
Although you've singled that one out, another poster was kind enough to
educate his dumbass about tn gun laws and carry permits. What I said
was legit.

And no, I wasn't threatening him or anyone else. I just don't have to
waste time getting into a fist fight with somebody. The reason the law
is the way it is, is because that fist fight could turn into the guy
going for my gun; which I cannot allow. So, they allow us to pull and
use it, even in a "fistfight". It's the same principle of you trying to
acquire a cops weapon using your hands. They can shoot you too.


--
(Hey) I keep on thinking that it's
(Hey) all done and all over now (whoa)
You keep on thinking you can save me save me
(Hey) My ship is sinking but it's
(Hey) all good and I can go down (whoa)
You've got me thinking that the party's all over

[Bullwinkle.]

Not necessaryly true where bd hails from.



"Dustin" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9F1ECB58541EDHHI2948AJD832@no...
~It's the same principle of you trying to
acquire a cops weapon using your hands. They can shoot you too.

[Bear Bottoms]

Dustin <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in
news:Xns9F1EC728E7B7AHHI2948AJD832@no:

> ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in
> news:3emdnWr0buiFgYfTnZ2dnUVZ8gGdnZ2d@bt.com:
>
>> Tell me Dustin - why doesn't MBAM have a version to protect Apple OS
>> X?
>
> You should post that question in the forum.
>
>> Or Linux variants for that matter?
>
> See above.
>
>> Oh yes. If I *do* decide to buy Malwarebytes for my /Windows/
>> computers, will I be permitted to post on the MBAM forums
>> (officially) again? I'd like to know! TIA
>
> I wouldn't know David. Your banning had nothing to do with your usage of
> the software. I don't think you'll be unbanned anytime soon. I wouldn't
> put in a good word for you. hehehe, and you know what's so funny? You'd
> probably HAVE TO have that before you'd have a shot in hell. Nice huh?

He's polite when he speaks to me in ACF.

--
Bear Bottoms http://bearware.info
Moderated alternative to alt.comp.freeware:
AltCompFreeware-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

[Dustin]

Bear Bottoms <bearbottoms1@gmai.com> wrote in
news:Xns9F1F7C00FA336bearbottoms1gmaicom@130.225.2 54.104:

> Dustin <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:Xns9F1EC728E7B7AHHI2948AJD832@no:
>
>> ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in
>> news:3emdnWr0buiFgYfTnZ2dnUVZ8gGdnZ2d@bt.com:
>>
>>> Tell me Dustin - why doesn't MBAM have a version to protect Apple
>>> OS X?
>>
>> You should post that question in the forum.
>>
>>> Or Linux variants for that matter?
>>
>> See above.
>>
>>> Oh yes. If I *do* decide to buy Malwarebytes for my /Windows/
>>> computers, will I be permitted to post on the MBAM forums
>>> (officially) again? I'd like to know! TIA
>>
>> I wouldn't know David. Your banning had nothing to do with your
>> usage of the software. I don't think you'll be unbanned anytime
>> soon. I wouldn't put in a good word for you. hehehe, and you know
>> what's so funny? You'd probably HAVE TO have that before you'd have
>> a shot in hell. Nice huh?
>
> He's polite when he speaks to me in ACF.

Until he gets a hinky feeling about you, he will be. He was very polite
when I first encountered him too.




--
(Hey) I keep on thinking that it's
(Hey) all done and all over now (whoa)
You keep on thinking you can save me save me
(Hey) My ship is sinking but it's
(Hey) all good and I can go down (whoa)
You've got me thinking that the party's all over