HOSTS Spybot F-Secure BackWeb

[FromTheRafters]

"Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:mtLcb.158665$3o3.11358935@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> I find that most your post was jibber.
>
> No reputable computer security company should be including ANYKIND of
> adware/spyware code in there downloads.

It is *not* adware or spyware, it is a legitimate application
that some adware and spyware abuses. E-mail worms use
SMTP, but that shouldn'r mean that anyone using SMTP
is malicious by association.

> I say blacklist F-Secure for so doing.

Say it all you want, but those with a clue won't listen.

> Both Adware and Spybot remove BackWeb...therefore BackWeb is bad stuff!

Erroneous conclusion.

> You wanna supply any reputable source saying BackWeb is good stuff?

I will leave that to others, or will try to supply info tomorrow if nobody
else does beforehand.

Later.

[Ron Reaugh]

The presence of BackWeb in the F-Secure download and the fact that it causes
SpyBot to hang an XP system is simply unconscionable and moves F-Secure to
the dark side.

"FromTheRafters" <!0000@nomad.fake> wrote in message
news:vn742cgi48qkb6@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:mtLcb.158665$3o3.11358935@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > I find that most your post was jibber.
> >
> > No reputable computer security company should be including ANYKIND of
> > adware/spyware code in there downloads.
>
> It is *not* adware or spyware, it is a legitimate application
> that some adware and spyware abuses. E-mail worms use
> SMTP, but that shouldn'r mean that anyone using SMTP
> is malicious by association.
>
> > I say blacklist F-Secure for so doing.
>
> Say it all you want, but those with a clue won't listen.
>
> > Both Adware and Spybot remove BackWeb...therefore BackWeb is bad stuff!
>
> Erroneous conclusion.
>
> > You wanna supply any reputable source saying BackWeb is good stuff?
>
> I will leave that to others, or will try to supply info tomorrow if nobody
> else does beforehand.
>
> Later.
>
>

[Colonel Flagg]

In article <9RMcb.153330$0v4.11425106@bgtnsc04-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net says...
> The presence of BackWeb in the F-Secure download and the fact that it causes
> SpyBot to hang an XP system is simply unconscionable and moves F-Secure to
> the dark side.


You're a goddamn idiot.

Backweb isn't bad, the people that MISUSE it *under certain
circumstances* would be considered bad.

a gun, when sitting in a cabinet harms no one... put it in a crack-heads
hands and someone will eventually get shot....

a piece of software, hell, let's say Internet Explorer is *meant* to
view websites, browse the web, whatever.... when placed in the wrong
hands.... you can completely and totally destroy websites with it
through Unicode Exploits...

Backweb is used by legitimate and accepted programs.

Backweb is used by illegitimate and unacceptable malicious programs.

Get the idea you ****ing moron?

[Ron Reaugh]

"Colonel Flagg" <colonel_flagg@NOSOUPFORJ00internetwarzone.org> wrote in
message news:MPG.19dd71702dd712d9989b1e@news.charter.net.. .
> In article <9RMcb.153330$0v4.11425106@bgtnsc04-
> news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net says...
> > The presence of BackWeb in the F-Secure download and the fact that it
causes
> > SpyBot to hang an XP system is simply unconscionable and moves F-Secure
to
> > the dark side.
>
>
> You're a goddamn idiot.
>
> Backweb isn't bad, the people that MISUSE it *under certain
> circumstances* would be considered bad.

Clueless.

Try your nonsensical rantings on the folks at SpyBot who immediately strip
out(or at least try to) that which F-Secure Trialware installs aka BackWeb.
What is F-Secure doing installing something(BackWeb) that SpyBot has
identified as something to rip out? What is F-Secure doing installing
something(BackWeb) that is SpyBot resistant and results in system hangs?
That's the smokin gun here.

Blacklist F-Secure is the obvoius course for those with a clue.

[Colonel Flagg]

In article <XYNcb.153412$0v4.11432897@bgtnsc04-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net says...
>
> "Colonel Flagg" <colonel_flagg@NOSOUPFORJ00internetwarzone.org> wrote in
> message news:MPG.19dd71702dd712d9989b1e@news.charter.net.. .
> > In article <9RMcb.153330$0v4.11425106@bgtnsc04-
> > news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net says...
> > > The presence of BackWeb in the F-Secure download and the fact that it
> causes
> > > SpyBot to hang an XP system is simply unconscionable and moves F-Secure
> to
> > > the dark side.
> >
> >
> > You're a goddamn idiot.
> >
> > Backweb isn't bad, the people that MISUSE it *under certain
> > circumstances* would be considered bad.
>
> Clueless.
>
> Try your nonsensical rantings on the folks at SpyBot who immediately strip
> out(or at least try to) that which F-Secure Trialware installs aka BackWeb.
> What is F-Secure doing installing something(BackWeb) that SpyBot has
> identified as something to rip out? What is F-Secure doing installing
> something(BackWeb) that is SpyBot resistant and results in system hangs?
> That's the smokin gun here.
>
> Blacklist F-Secure is the obvoius course for those with a clue.
>
>
>


no only are you a ****ing moron, you don't have the ability to be
anything else.

you're now in the *plonk* file.

and you're dismissed.

see folks, "ron reaugh" is what happens when cousins breed.



--
Colonel Flagg
http://www.internetwarzone.org/

Privacy at a click:
http://www.cotse.net

Q: How many Bill Gates does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None, he just defines Darkness? as the new industry standard..."

"...I see stupid people."

[Ron Reaugh]

"Colonel Flagg" <colonel_flagg@NOSOUPFORJ00internetwarzone.org> wrote in
message > you're now in the *plonk* file.

The usual response of the outwitted and classless trolls.

[Jeffrey A. Setaro]

In article <XYNcb.153412$0v4.11432897@bgtnsc04-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net says...
>
> "Colonel Flagg" <colonel_flagg@NOSOUPFORJ00internetwarzone.org> wrote in
> message news:MPG.19dd71702dd712d9989b1e@news.charter.net.. .
> > In article <9RMcb.153330$0v4.11425106@bgtnsc04-
> > news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net says...
> > > The presence of BackWeb in the F-Secure download and the fact that it
> causes
> > > SpyBot to hang an XP system is simply unconscionable and moves F-Secure
> to
> > > the dark side.
> >
> >
> > You're a goddamn idiot.
> >
> > Backweb isn't bad, the people that MISUSE it *under certain
> > circumstances* would be considered bad.
>
> Clueless.
>

Pot. Kettle. Black.

> Try your nonsensical rantings on the folks at SpyBot who immediately strip
> out(or at least try to) that which F-Secure Trialware installs aka BackWeb.
> What is F-Secure doing installing something(BackWeb) that SpyBot has
> identified as something to rip out?

F-Secure uses Backweb to deliver definition updates automatically. (The
retail versions of F-Secure AV also use Backweb to download and install
product updates. )

SyBot is wrong. It's that simple!

> What is F-Secure doing installing
> something(BackWeb) that is SpyBot resistant and results in system hangs?
> That's the smokin gun here.
>

ROLFMAO! The only "smoking gun" here is the one pointed at you... You
clearly didn't bother to read any of the F-Secure product documentation.
F-Secure doesn't hide the fact they use Backweb to deliver updates.

(I'm not sure about the retail versions but you can opt not to install
Backweb in the enterprise versions.)

> Blacklist F-Secure is the obvoius course for those with a clue.
>

Nah... Lets blacklist you (seeing as you are completely clueless).

[Jari Lehtonen]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:44:34 -0400, Jeffrey A. Setaro
<jasetaro@SPAM.ME.NOT.mags.net> wrote:

>(I'm not sure about the retail versions but you can opt not to install
>Backweb in the enterprise versions.)
>
Yes it does, but it install also a iadhid.dll (or like that) which is
meant to suppress the ads.

Jari

[Colonel Flagg]

In article <MPG.19dd71702dd712d9989b1e@news.charter.net>,
colonel_flagg@NOSOUPFORJ00internetwarzone.org says...
> In article <9RMcb.153330$0v4.11425106@bgtnsc04-
> news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net says...
> > The presence of BackWeb in the F-Secure download and the fact that it causes
> > SpyBot to hang an XP system is simply unconscionable and moves F-Secure to
> > the dark side.
>
>
> You're a goddamn idiot.
>
> Backweb isn't bad, the people that MISUSE it *under certain
> circumstances* would be considered bad.
>
> a gun, when sitting in a cabinet harms no one... put it in a crack-heads
> hands and someone will eventually get shot....
>
> a piece of software, hell, let's say Internet Explorer is *meant* to
> view websites, browse the web, whatever.... when placed in the wrong
> hands.... you can completely and totally destroy websites with it
> through Unicode Exploits...
>
> Backweb is used by legitimate and accepted programs.
>
> Backweb is used by illegitimate and unacceptable malicious programs.
>
> Get the idea you ****ing moron?
>
>
>
>



--
Colonel Flagg
http://www.internetwarzone.org/

Privacy at a click:
http://www.cotse.net

Q: How many Bill Gates does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None, he just defines Darkness? as the new industry standard..."

"...I see stupid people."

[donutbandit]

"Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
news:9RMcb.153330$0v4.11425106@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

> The presence of BackWeb in the F-Secure download and the fact that it
> causes SpyBot to hang an XP system is simply unconscionable and moves
> F-Secure to the dark side.

Perhaps you are over reacting. However, I would not want someone installing
what amounts to a backdoor on my box even if it WAS to install automatic
updates.

That's why I stay away from any such applications. I prefer to go and get
my own updates.