Spyblaster on Win 7

[Dustin]

~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in news:jb5a8b$gb7$1@dont-email.me:

> What you say is explained here:-
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Directory
>
> You are probably well aware of all the information therein. I was not!

Then, instead of berating, you should have made an effort to educate
yourself. Eh? Peter and David both knew the subject.


--
Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too many
people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and the only
thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J.C. Watts

[Dustin]

~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in news:jb5u5q$nrg$1@dont-email.me:

> Aardvark wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 07:21:42 -0500, David H. Lipman wrote:
> [....]
>> I run Klamav on my LAMP (and other applications) server here. Basically,
>> just for the hell of it, but generally in case someone running Windoze
>> connects to it..
>
> Translation: I'm computer sto0pid.

Yes, yes you are.

> Perhaps you really mean Clamav? http://www.clamav.net/lang/en/

No. He meant KlamAv. Google it. Tell me how crow tastes.

> Dopey! ;-)

Stupid ****.


--
Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too many
people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and the only
thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J.C. Watts

[Dustin]

~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in news:jb4nnp$b8f$1@dont-email.me:

> FromTheRafters wrote:
>> ~BD~ wrote:
>>> Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>> "~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:jb33aa$vs2$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>> Peter Foldes professes to be a computer guru and an ex-Microsoft MVP.
>>>>> He'd surely be aware of what you claim - you can't both be right!
>>>>
>>>> You are Trolling again BD
>>>
>>> No - not at all!
>>>
>>> *You* said "The 2 other servers which I use for home use along with the
>>> family I have SpywareBlaster, SAS, Malwarebytes and Emisoft installed
>>> and running and those 2 machines are basically for home use and I
really
>>> do not need anything else on it."
>>>
>>> *David Lipman* said ""Browsing" that can get a user into trouble on a
>>> workstation should *never* be done on a server platform ..."
>>>
>>> The two statements are incongruous. <shrug>
>>
>> Not really. The term "server" can refer both to the software and to the
>> role of the machine.
>
>
> I have read here and do understand what you say, FTR.
> http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/S/server.html
>
> Maybe you can help me understand why it is apparently OK to protect a
> 'home' server but unnecessary to protect what PF calls a 'work' server?

That isn't what Peter said. A "home" server isn't likely to have mission
critical activities or data. A "work" server is.




--
Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too
many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and
the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J.C. Watts

[Dustin]

"Peter Foldes" <okf22@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:jb3eis$qm5$1@speranza.aioe.org:

> "~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message
> news:jb33aa$vs2$1@dont-email.me...
>> David H. Lipman wrote:
>>> From: "Peter Foldes"<okf22@hotmail.com>
> `
>> I've not recognised anything that supports your view that software
>> should not be installed on a server. Please will you supply some
>> further advice about this, Mr Lipman?
>>
>> Peter Foldes professes to be a computer guru and an ex-Microsoft MVP.
>> He'd surely be aware of what you claim - you can't both be right!
>
>
> BD
>
> David is correct with his post. On a working Server you need an AV and
> other Malware for specialized protection that is not listed in any of
> the posts here. The only reason that I mentioned it to Silj's post was
> to let all know that it does work on a server but like David posted it
> should not be installed on a WORKING Server on account that it will not
> cover the full scope of the server. Before anyone mentions to the latter
> (full scope ) I posted it in layman terms for BD to understand.
> Explaining the full reasoning behind it to BD will cause him to
> mis-understand or fully not understand the complete factual details.

He hasn't grasped the concept in any event. Now he's simply putting words
in your mouth.


--
Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too
many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and
the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J.C. Watts

[Bullwinkle.]

"~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message
news:jb6658$i0v$1@dont-email.me...

Path:
Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com !nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nn tp.bt.com!news.bt.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:34:41 -0600
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:34:41 +0000
From: ~BD~ <BoaterDave'remove'@hotmail.co.uk>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.test.here
Subject: Re: Wow! Some inside information disclosed?
References: <HfCdnXslYv2OU2_XnZ2dnUVZ8vSdnZ2d@bt.com>
<#5HDwuhXKHA.1268@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>
<7dWdnUn-lsA8f2_XnZ2dnUVZ8lZi4p2d@bt.com>
<iISdnemK2rDuZ2_XnZ2dnUVZ8n-dnZ2d@bt.com>
<MbidnX_r9pF3m27XnZ2dnUVZ8l-dnZ2d@bt.com>
<baadnVUCMZVUgm7XnZ2dnUVZ8uidnZ2d@bt.com>
In-Reply-To: <baadnVUCMZVUgm7XnZ2dnUVZ8uidnZ2d@bt.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <OsmdnSrcR6hs2W7XnZ2dnUVZ8hudnZ2d@bt.com>
Lines: 140
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-AuthenticatedUsername: NoAuthUser
X-Trace:
sv3-BHci9ippSXnVgMxUz9KLm/mEVJGqG+fWmxkLdD3X6KO1/+qmzgQIvtTIr8eq8HFyJ5dKbqScxKL6QsJ!8kvcPVte2GMR7Tm S31i5EfYPRLhlURK9655dLxWYMtk1u+YD/3QDKXcBGnTyWO9QCyHfsva5220=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@btinternet.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@btinternet.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 6589
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com microsoft.public.test.here:7478747



>> In case you are wondering, I am *not* being paid -
>
> I wasn't wondering, what made you say that?

I've mentioned before that because of my 20+ years of active service in
the Royal Navy I qualified for continuing service with MI5 (rather like
007) but decided to help on a non-contractual basis without accepting
further Government funds. I do, though, keep in close contact with 'the
authorities'.


>> --
>> Dave
>>
>
>

[Aardvark]

On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:45:20 -0500, FromTheRafters wrote:

> The less new programs you add to a system, the less you need to protect
> it from.

Fewer.

FYI
HTH
HAND

:-)



--
"And thus I clothe my naked villany
With odd old ends stol'n out of holy writ,
And seem a saint, when most I play the devil."
King Richard III (I, iii, 336-338)

[Aardvark]

On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 05:25:55 +0000, Dustin wrote:

> Sto0pid BD wrote:
>> One never can tell the skill level of folk reading here! Never assume,
>> check!
>
> Learn to use google. Learn to read. Simple.

That'll be the day, Dustin.

BTW IOU a email.



--
"And thus I clothe my naked villany
With odd old ends stol'n out of holy writ,
And seem a saint, when most I play the devil."
King Richard III (I, iii, 336-338)

[Aardvark]

On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 0504 +0000, Dustin wrote:

> ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in news:jb5a8b$gb7$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> What you say is explained here:-
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Directory
>>
>> You are probably well aware of all the information therein. I was not!
>
> Then, instead of berating, you should have made an effort to educate
> yourself. Eh? Peter and David both knew the subject.

It's obvious that it all goes in one ear (eye?) and out the other. He
just doesn't have a knack for computer stuff.



--
"And thus I clothe my naked villany
With odd old ends stol'n out of holy writ,
And seem a saint, when most I play the devil."
King Richard III (I, iii, 336-338)

[Aardvark]

On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 05:28:05 +0000, Dustin wrote:

> ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in news:jb5u5q$nrg$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> Aardvark wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 07:21:42 -0500, David H. Lipman wrote:
>> [....]
>>> I run Klamav on my LAMP (and other applications) server here.
>>> Basically,
>>> just for the hell of it, but generally in case someone running Windoze
>>> connects to it..
>>
>> Translation: I'm computer sto0pid.
>
> Yes, yes you are.
>
>> Perhaps you really mean Clamav? http://www.clamav.net/lang/en/
>
> No. He meant KlamAv. Google it. Tell me how crow tastes.
>
>> Dopey! ;-)
>
> Stupid ****.

LOL.

Give him a break, Dustin. He knows very little about Window$, so there's
no ****ing chance he knows a damned thing about Linux.

Clamav, Klamav? Who gives a ****? I opened a SSH shell and typed 'sudo
apt-get install klamav -y' and it did everything for me.



--
"And thus I clothe my naked villany
With odd old ends stol'n out of holy writ,
And seem a saint, when most I play the devil."
King Richard III (I, iii, 336-338)

[Aardvark]

On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 05:28:05 +0000, Dustin wrote:

> ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in news:jb5u5q$nrg$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> Aardvark wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 07:21:42 -0500, David H. Lipman wrote:
>> [....]
>>> I run Klamav on my LAMP (and other applications) server here.
>>> Basically,
>>> just for the hell of it, but generally in case someone running Windoze
>>> connects to it..
>>
>> Translation: I'm computer sto0pid.
>
> Yes, yes you are.
>
>> Perhaps you really mean Clamav? http://www.clamav.net/lang/en/
>
> No. He meant KlamAv. Google it. Tell me how crow tastes.
>
>> Dopey! ;-)
>
> Stupid ****.

LOL.

Give him a break, Dustin. He knows very little about Window$, so there's
no ****ing chance he knows a damned thing about Linux.

Clamav, Klamav? Who gives a ****? I opened a SSH shell and typed 'sudo
apt-get install klamav -y' and it did everything for me.



--
"And thus I clothe my naked villany
With odd old ends stol'n out of holy writ,
And seem a saint, when most I play the devil."
King Richard III (I, iii, 336-338)