Desktop antivirus - it's dead

[George Orwell]

PC World
http://elfurl.com/qympl

Some industry analysts are proclaiming the traditional antivirus method
for detecting and eradicating viruses, trojans, spyware and other
baneful code by matching it against a signature
http://************/crapware to be "dead."

They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of virus
variants manufactured by a criminal underworld that is beating the
antivirus vendors at their own game. And they are arguing it's time for
companies to adopt newer approaches, such as whitelisting or behavior-
blocking, to protect desktops and servers.

"It's the beginning of the end for antivirus," says Robin Bloor,
partner at consulting firm Hurwitz & Associates, in Boston, who adds he
began his "antivirus is dead" campaign a year ago and feels even more
strongly about it today. "...The approach antivirus vendors take is
completely wrong. The criminals working to release these viruses
against computer users are testing against antivirus software. They
know what works and how to create variants."

...Instead of antivirus software, he says, users should be investing in
whitelisting software that prevents viruses from running because it
only allows authorized applications to run.

Whitelisting products are available from SecureWave, Bit9, Savant,
AppSense and CA, the first traditional antivirus vendor to see the
light, in Bloor's view.

[Virus Guy]

George Orwell wrote:

> And they are arguing it's time for companies to adopt newer
> approaches, such as whitelisting or behavior- blocking,
> to protect desktops and servers.

Why aren't we talking about a whole-sale disconnection of the China IP
space so that NS and web-hosts located in China aren't a threat any
more?

Why aren't we talking about ICANN growing some balls and de-listing
the registrars that are giving throw-away domains to spammers and
hackers? (yes, they GIVE them away - it's called domain "tasting").

[Dustin Cook]

George Orwell <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in
news:8e5d066818cf60589120f30c9e00db49@mixmaster.it :

> PC World
> http://elfurl.com/qympl
>
> Some industry analysts are proclaiming the traditional antivirus method
> for detecting and eradicating viruses, trojans, spyware and other
> baneful code by matching it against a signature
> http://************/crapware to be "dead."

*yawn*


> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of virus
> variants manufactured by a criminal underworld that is beating the
> antivirus vendors at their own game. And they are arguing it's time for
> companies to adopt newer approaches, such as whitelisting or behavior-
> blocking, to protect desktops and servers.

Behavior blocking isn't new, and for that matter, neither is
whitelisting. They aren't in widespread use due to the annoyances each
option presents. Behavior blockers are bad about blocking legitimate
applications as well, annoying users to the point where they just turn it
off.

Whitelisting is nice n all, but How does one get the software authorized?
Who has control over this autorization? How does the whitelisting system
ensure the programs are legitimately whitelisted, and one of them didn't
add itself?

> "It's the beginning of the end for antivirus," says Robin Bloor,
> partner at consulting firm Hurwitz & Associates, in Boston, who adds he
> began his "antivirus is dead" campaign a year ago and feels even more
> strongly about it today. "...The approach antivirus vendors take is
> completely wrong. The criminals working to release these viruses
> against computer users are testing against antivirus software. They
> know what works and how to create variants."

This is very deceptive and shady. Virus scanners have always been tested
by the other guys, Both sides know this. It's called knowing thy enemy.
Your just trying to scare people with this recycled crap of yours.

> ..Instead of antivirus software, he says, users should be investing in
> whitelisting software that prevents viruses from running because it
> only allows authorized applications to run.

This will not prevent all viruses from running. Trojans, rootkits, etc.
It's a very misleading comment and may lead users into a very real false
sense of security.


--
Dustin Cook
Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - V2.2
web: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk - email:
bughunter.dustin@gmail.com.removethis
Pad: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml

[cbgerry]

On Apr 6, 3:45 pm, George Orwell <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-
Header@[127.1]> wrote:
> PC Worldhttp://elfurl.com/qympl
>
> Some industry analysts are proclaiming the traditional antivirus method
> for detecting and eradicating viruses, trojans, spyware and other
> baneful code by matching it against a signaturehttp://************/crapwareto be "dead."
>
> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of virus
> variants manufactured by a criminal underworld that is beating the
> antivirus vendors at their own game. And they are arguing it's time for
> companies to adopt newer approaches, such as whitelisting or behavior-
> blocking, to protect desktops and servers.
>
> "It's the beginning of the end for antivirus," says Robin Bloor,
> partner at consulting firm Hurwitz & Associates, in Boston, who adds he
> began his "antivirus is dead" campaign a year ago and feels even more
> strongly about it today. "...The approach antivirus vendors take is
> completely wrong. The criminals working to release these viruses
> against computer users are testing against antivirus software. They
> know what works and how to create variants."
>
> ..Instead of antivirus software, he says, users should be investing in
> whitelisting software that prevents viruses from running because it
> only allows authorized applications to run.
>
> Whitelisting products are available from SecureWave, Bit9, Savant,
> AppSense and CA, the first traditional antivirus vendor to see the
> light, in Bloor's view.

========================>

They mean "heurisitics" in all descent antivirus paid protection ?
Duh.... heurisitics. This is activated meaning real time protection in
paid subscription antivirus software programs. Heurisitics is the
ability to identifiy the malware threat by typical behavior without
having the definitions yet written for removal and blocking of the
particular threat - worm, virus, many trojans.

""QUOTE""
> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of virus
""UNQUOTE""

....and it never did and never will. For newbies these idiot editors
are writing to (and I am not the only one recognizing this) - for
newbies / novice information here, the writer is calling a system scan
with your antivirus as "signature-based checking" - like duh a-hole.
Why would you do a scan, find and remove malware and then turn around
and say that the PC was protected in the beginning as "signature-based
checking" ??? How the h*ll was the PC ever protected by "sinature-
based checking"?"?? Duh !!!

So where's the distinction that something is or did die ???? Idiot
Editors playing with new people's minds. Malicious bad information
even intentionally. I have caught some of the4se creeps before giving
out bad information and responded to it.

""QUOTE""
they are arguing it's time for companies to adopt newer approaches,
such as ... behavior- blocking
""UNQUOTE""

....You mean BUY some antivirus protection ??? to activate real time
protection - - Duh !!!

This is the result of trolls, criminal elements, idiots, plain
newbies, and bragging rights malicious persons giving the constant
idea of freeware security as your silver bullet. That is absurd and
even for the most new person. Anybody new to computers instantly
realizes that the software business is a multi-million and multi-
billion dollar industry. You can't even miss that one on TV News
always informing the public of the amount of trade done over the
internet if you are not a computer owner/operator. I believe it is in
the neighborhood of 16 billion dollars yearly or more. So point is the
"newbie" knows better and are taking their chances and they know it.
They know you are only getting what they pay for in the worst
ignorance of software or computers.

A little knowledge spread around stops all of this in a very, very
great degree.

[cmsix]

"cbgerry" <cbgerry@bluecollarpc.net> wrote in message
news:1176066034.635620.156670@b75g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
> On Apr 6, 3:45 pm, George Orwell <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-
> Header@[127.1]> wrote:
>> PC Worldhttp://elfurl.com/qympl
>>
>> Some industry analysts are proclaiming the traditional antivirus method
>> for detecting and eradicating viruses, trojans, spyware and other
>> baneful code by matching it against a
>> signaturehttp://************/crapwareto be "dead."
>>
>> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of virus
>> variants manufactured by a criminal underworld that is beating the
>> antivirus vendors at their own game. And they are arguing it's time for
>> companies to adopt newer approaches, such as whitelisting or behavior-
>> blocking, to protect desktops and servers.
>>
>> "It's the beginning of the end for antivirus," says Robin Bloor,
>> partner at consulting firm Hurwitz & Associates, in Boston, who adds he
>> began his "antivirus is dead" campaign a year ago and feels even more
>> strongly about it today. "...The approach antivirus vendors take is
>> completely wrong. The criminals working to release these viruses
>> against computer users are testing against antivirus software. They
>> know what works and how to create variants."
>>
>> ..Instead of antivirus software, he says, users should be investing in
>> whitelisting software that prevents viruses from running because it
>> only allows authorized applications to run.
>>
>> Whitelisting products are available from SecureWave, Bit9, Savant,
>> AppSense and CA, the first traditional antivirus vendor to see the
>> light, in Bloor's view.
>
> ========================>
>
> They mean "heurisitics" in all descent antivirus paid protection ?
> Duh.... heurisitics. This is activated meaning real time protection in
> paid subscription antivirus software programs. Heurisitics is the
> ability to identifiy the malware threat by typical behavior without
> having the definitions yet written for removal and blocking of the
> particular threat - worm, virus, many trojans.
>
> ""QUOTE""
>> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of virus
> ""UNQUOTE""
>
> ...and it never did and never will. For newbies these idiot editors
> are writing to (and I am not the only one recognizing this) - for
> newbies / novice information here, the writer is calling a system scan
> with your antivirus as "signature-based checking" - like duh a-hole.
> Why would you do a scan, find and remove malware and then turn around
> and say that the PC was protected in the beginning as "signature-based
> checking" ??? How the h*ll was the PC ever protected by "sinature-
> based checking"?"?? Duh !!!
>
> So where's the distinction that something is or did die ???? Idiot
> Editors playing with new people's minds. Malicious bad information
> even intentionally. I have caught some of the4se creeps before giving
> out bad information and responded to it.
>
> ""QUOTE""
> they are arguing it's time for companies to adopt newer approaches,
> such as ... behavior- blocking
> ""UNQUOTE""
>
> ...You mean BUY some antivirus protection ??? to activate real time
> protection - - Duh !!!
>
> This is the result of trolls, criminal elements, idiots, plain
> newbies, and bragging rights malicious persons giving the constant
> idea of freeware security as your silver bullet. That is absurd and
> even for the most new person. Anybody new to computers instantly
> realizes that the software business is a multi-million and multi-
> billion dollar industry. You can't even miss that one on TV News
> always informing the public of the amount of trade done over the
> internet if you are not a computer owner/operator. I believe it is in
> the neighborhood of 16 billion dollars yearly or more. So point is the
> "newbie" knows better and are taking their chances and they know it.
> They know you are only getting what they pay for in the worst
> ignorance of software or computers.
>
> A little knowledge spread around stops all of this in a very, very
> great degree.


Hell, you don't even have to buy any. You can download avast for free and it
does real time checking, even scans incoming email.

Of course the most common path of infection can be easily blocked by simply
turning off html rendering in your mail client. No text message has ever
infected a machine without the help of that machine's user.

cmsix

>

[cbgerry]

On Apr 8, 5:19 pm, "cmsix" <c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "cbgerry" <cbge...@bluecollarpc.net> wrote in message
>
> news:1176066034.635620.156670@b75g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Apr 6, 3:45 pm, George Orwell <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-
> > Header@[127.1]> wrote:
> >> PC Worldhttp://elfurl.com/qympl
>
> >> Some industry analysts are proclaiming the traditional antivirus method
> >> for detecting and eradicating viruses, trojans, spyware and other
> >> baneful code by matching it against a
> >> signaturehttp://************/crapwaretobe "dead."
>
> >> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of virus
> >> variants manufactured by a criminal underworld that is beating the
> >> antivirus vendors at their own game. And they are arguing it's time for
> >> companies to adopt newer approaches, such as whitelisting or behavior-
> >> blocking, to protect desktops and servers.
>
> >> "It's the beginning of the end for antivirus," says Robin Bloor,
> >> partner at consulting firm Hurwitz & Associates, in Boston, who adds he
> >> began his "antivirus is dead" campaign a year ago and feels even more
> >> strongly about it today. "...The approach antivirus vendors take is
> >> completely wrong. The criminals working to release these viruses
> >> against computer users are testing against antivirus software. They
> >> know what works and how to create variants."
>
> >> ..Instead of antivirus software, he says, users should be investing in
> >> whitelisting software that prevents viruses from running because it
> >> only allows authorized applications to run.
>
> >> Whitelisting products are available from SecureWave, Bit9, Savant,
> >> AppSense and CA, the first traditional antivirus vendor to see the
> >> light, in Bloor's view.
>
> > ========================>
>
> > They mean "heurisitics" in all descent antivirus paid protection ?
> > Duh.... heurisitics. This is activated meaning real time protection in
> > paid subscription antivirus software programs. Heurisitics is the
> > ability to identifiy the malware threat by typical behavior without
> > having the definitions yet written for removal and blocking of the
> > particular threat - worm, virus, many trojans.
>
> > ""QUOTE""
> >> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of virus
> > ""UNQUOTE""
>
> > ...and it never did and never will. For newbies these idiot editors
> > are writing to (and I am not the only one recognizing this) - for
> > newbies / novice information here, the writer is calling a system scan
> > with your antivirus as "signature-based checking" - like duh a-hole.
> > Why would you do a scan, find and remove malware and then turn around
> > and say that the PC was protected in the beginning as "signature-based
> > checking" ??? How the h*ll was the PC ever protected by "sinature-
> > based checking"?"?? Duh !!!
>
> > So where's the distinction that something is or did die ???? Idiot
> > Editors playing with new people's minds. Malicious bad information
> > even intentionally. I have caught some of the4se creeps before giving
> > out bad information and responded to it.
>
> > ""QUOTE""
> > they are arguing it's time for companies to adopt newer approaches,
> > such as ... behavior- blocking
> > ""UNQUOTE""
>
> > ...You mean BUY some antivirus protection ??? to activate real time
> > protection - - Duh !!!
>
> > This is the result of trolls, criminal elements, idiots, plain
> > newbies, and bragging rights malicious persons giving the constant
> > idea of freeware security as your silver bullet. That is absurd and
> > even for the most new person. Anybody new to computers instantly
> > realizes that the software business is a multi-million and multi-
> > billion dollar industry. You can't even miss that one on TV News
> > always informing the public of the amount of trade done over the
> > internet if you are not a computer owner/operator. I believe it is in
> > the neighborhood of 16 billion dollars yearly or more. So point is the
> > "newbie" knows better and are taking their chances and they know it.
> > They know you are only getting what they pay for in the worst
> > ignorance of software or computers.
>
> > A little knowledge spread around stops all of this in a very, very
> > great degree.
>
> Hell, you don't even have to buy any. You can download avast for free and it
> does real time checking, even scans incoming email.
>
> Of course the most common path of infection can be easily blocked by simply
> turning off html rendering in your mail client. No text message has ever
> infected a machine without the help of that machine's user.
>
> cmsix
>
>

========================>
And what protection does free antivirus offer when browsing the
internet ? Free open source Clam AV has an Outlook plug-in to scan
email. But you are only talking about being protected with email
scanning. What about browsing ? That is absurd to just use a computer
for email - cell phones do that. I have never heard of such a thing
that someone pays up to and over 2 thousand dollars for a computer and
then not use it because free antivirus only scans email. Strange
answer.

[Dustin Cook]

"cbgerry" <cbgerry@bluecollarpc.net> wrote in
news:1176069380.219622.283790@l77g2000hsb.googlegr oups.com:

> On Apr 8, 5:19 pm, "cmsix" <c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "cbgerry" <cbge...@bluecollarpc.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1176066034.635620.156670@b75g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 6, 3:45 pm, George Orwell <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-
>> > Header@[127.1]> wrote:
>> >> PC Worldhttp://elfurl.com/qympl
>>
>> >> Some industry analysts are proclaiming the traditional antivirus
>> >> method for detecting and eradicating viruses, trojans, spyware and
>> >> other baneful code by matching it against a
>> >> signaturehttp://************/crapwaretobe "dead."
>>
>> >> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of
>> >> virus variants manufactured by a criminal underworld that is
>> >> beating the antivirus vendors at their own game. And they are
>> >> arguing it's time for companies to adopt newer approaches, such as
>> >> whitelisting or behavior- blocking, to protect desktops and
>> >> servers.
>>
>> >> "It's the beginning of the end for antivirus," says Robin Bloor,
>> >> partner at consulting firm Hurwitz & Associates, in Boston, who
>> >> adds he began his "antivirus is dead" campaign a year ago and
>> >> feels even more strongly about it today. "...The approach
>> >> antivirus vendors take is completely wrong. The criminals working
>> >> to release these viruses against computer users are testing
>> >> against antivirus software. They know what works and how to create
>> >> variants."
>>
>> >> ..Instead of antivirus software, he says, users should be
>> >> investing in whitelisting software that prevents viruses from
>> >> running because it only allows authorized applications to run.
>>
>> >> Whitelisting products are available from SecureWave, Bit9, Savant,
>> >> AppSense and CA, the first traditional antivirus vendor to see the
>> >> light, in Bloor's view.
>>
>> > ========================>
>>
>> > They mean "heurisitics" in all descent antivirus paid protection ?
>> > Duh.... heurisitics. This is activated meaning real time protection
>> > in paid subscription antivirus software programs. Heurisitics is
>> > the ability to identifiy the malware threat by typical behavior
>> > without having the definitions yet written for removal and blocking
>> > of the particular threat - worm, virus, many trojans.
>>
>> > ""QUOTE""
>> >> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of
>> >> virus
>> > ""UNQUOTE""
>>
>> > ...and it never did and never will. For newbies these idiot editors
>> > are writing to (and I am not the only one recognizing this) - for
>> > newbies / novice information here, the writer is calling a system
>> > scan with your antivirus as "signature-based checking" - like duh
>> > a-hole. Why would you do a scan, find and remove malware and then
>> > turn around and say that the PC was protected in the beginning as
>> > "signature-based checking" ??? How the h*ll was the PC ever
>> > protected by "sinature- based checking"?"?? Duh !!!
>>
>> > So where's the distinction that something is or did die ???? Idiot
>> > Editors playing with new people's minds. Malicious bad information
>> > even intentionally. I have caught some of the4se creeps before
>> > giving out bad information and responded to it.
>>
>> > ""QUOTE""
>> > they are arguing it's time for companies to adopt newer approaches,
>> > such as ... behavior- blocking
>> > ""UNQUOTE""
>>
>> > ...You mean BUY some antivirus protection ??? to activate real time
>> > protection - - Duh !!!
>>
>> > This is the result of trolls, criminal elements, idiots, plain
>> > newbies, and bragging rights malicious persons giving the constant
>> > idea of freeware security as your silver bullet. That is absurd and
>> > even for the most new person. Anybody new to computers instantly
>> > realizes that the software business is a multi-million and multi-
>> > billion dollar industry. You can't even miss that one on TV News
>> > always informing the public of the amount of trade done over the
>> > internet if you are not a computer owner/operator. I believe it is
>> > in the neighborhood of 16 billion dollars yearly or more. So point
>> > is the "newbie" knows better and are taking their chances and they
>> > know it. They know you are only getting what they pay for in the
>> > worst ignorance of software or computers.
>>
>> > A little knowledge spread around stops all of this in a very, very
>> > great degree.
>>
>> Hell, you don't even have to buy any. You can download avast for free
>> and it does real time checking, even scans incoming email.
>>
>> Of course the most common path of infection can be easily blocked by
>> simply turning off html rendering in your mail client. No text
>> message has ever infected a machine without the help of that
>> machine's user.
>>
>> cmsix
>>
>>
>
> ========================>
> And what protection does free antivirus offer when browsing the
> internet ? Free open source Clam AV has an Outlook plug-in to scan
> email. But you are only talking about being protected with email
> scanning. What about browsing ? That is absurd to just use a computer
> for email - cell phones do that. I have never heard of such a thing
> that someone pays up to and over 2 thousand dollars for a computer and
> then not use it because free antivirus only scans email. Strange
> answer.
>
>

Ehh, If you don't mind me asking, what makes you think free antivirus
only scans email? Most resident antivirus scans files after
creation/during, when opening, before execution etc. In those cases, if
the malware is known to the scanner, it should flag it and provide you
some options for dealing with it, depending on your setup.



--
Dustin Cook
Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - v2.2a
email: bughunter.dustin@gmail.com.removethis
web..: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
Pad..: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml

[cbgerry]

On Apr 8, 11:58 pm, Dustin Cook
<spamfilterineffect.see....@nowhere.com> wrote:
> "cbgerry" <cbge...@bluecollarpc.net> wrote innews:1176069380.219622.283790@l77g2000hsb.google groups.com:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 8, 5:19 pm, "cmsix" <c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> "cbgerry" <cbge...@bluecollarpc.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1176066034.635620.156670@b75g2000hsg.google groups.com...
>
> >> > On Apr 6, 3:45 pm, George Orwell <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-
> >> > Header@[127.1]> wrote:
> >> >> PC Worldhttp://elfurl.com/qympl
>
> >> >> Some industry analysts are proclaiming the traditional antivirus
> >> >> method for detecting and eradicating viruses, trojans, spyware and
> >> >> other baneful code by matching it against a
> >> >> signaturehttp://************/crapwaretobe"dead."
>
> >> >> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of
> >> >> virus variants manufactured by a criminal underworld that is
> >> >> beating the antivirus vendors at their own game. And they are
> >> >> arguing it's time for companies to adopt newer approaches, such as
> >> >> whitelisting or behavior- blocking, to protect desktops and
> >> >> servers.
>
> >> >> "It's the beginning of the end for antivirus," says Robin Bloor,
> >> >> partner at consulting firm Hurwitz & Associates, in Boston, who
> >> >> adds he began his "antivirus is dead" campaign a year ago and
> >> >> feels even more strongly about it today. "...The approach
> >> >> antivirus vendors take is completely wrong. The criminals working
> >> >> to release these viruses against computer users are testing
> >> >> against antivirus software. They know what works and how to create
> >> >> variants."
>
> >> >> ..Instead of antivirus software, he says, users should be
> >> >> investing in whitelisting software that prevents viruses from
> >> >> running because it only allows authorized applications to run.
>
> >> >> Whitelisting products are available from SecureWave, Bit9, Savant,
> >> >> AppSense and CA, the first traditional antivirus vendor to see the
> >> >> light, in Bloor's view.
>
> >> > ========================>
>
> >> > They mean "heurisitics" in all descent antivirus paid protection ?
> >> > Duh.... heurisitics. This is activated meaning real time protection
> >> > in paid subscription antivirus software programs. Heurisitics is
> >> > the ability to identifiy the malware threat by typical behavior
> >> > without having the definitions yet written for removal and blocking
> >> > of the particular threat - worm, virus, many trojans.
>
> >> > ""QUOTE""
> >> >> They say signature-based checking can't keep up with the flood of
> >> >> virus
> >> > ""UNQUOTE""
>
> >> > ...and it never did and never will. For newbies these idiot editors
> >> > are writing to (and I am not the only one recognizing this) - for
> >> > newbies / novice information here, the writer is calling a system
> >> > scan with your antivirus as "signature-based checking" - like duh
> >> > a-hole. Why would you do a scan, find and remove malware and then
> >> > turn around and say that the PC was protected in the beginning as
> >> > "signature-based checking" ??? How the h*ll was the PC ever
> >> > protected by "sinature- based checking"?"?? Duh !!!
>
> >> > So where's the distinction that something is or did die ???? Idiot
> >> > Editors playing with new people's minds. Malicious bad information
> >> > even intentionally. I have caught some of the4se creeps before
> >> > giving out bad information and responded to it.
>
> >> > ""QUOTE""
> >> > they are arguing it's time for companies to adopt newer approaches,
> >> > such as ... behavior- blocking
> >> > ""UNQUOTE""
>
> >> > ...You mean BUY some antivirus protection ??? to activate real time
> >> > protection - - Duh !!!
>
> >> > This is the result of trolls, criminal elements, idiots, plain
> >> > newbies, and bragging rights malicious persons giving the constant
> >> > idea of freeware security as your silver bullet. That is absurd and
> >> > even for the most new person. Anybody new to computers instantly
> >> > realizes that the software business is a multi-million and multi-
> >> > billion dollar industry. You can't even miss that one on TV News
> >> > always informing the public of the amount of trade done over the
> >> > internet if you are not a computer owner/operator. I believe it is
> >> > in the neighborhood of 16 billion dollars yearly or more. So point
> >> > is the "newbie" knows better and are taking their chances and they
> >> > know it. They know you are only getting what they pay for in the
> >> > worst ignorance of software or computers.
>
> >> > A little knowledge spread around stops all of this in a very, very
> >> > great degree.
>
> >> Hell, you don't even have to buy any. You can download avast for free
> >> and it does real time checking, even scans incoming email.
>
> >> Of course the most common path of infection can be easily blocked by
> >> simply turning off html rendering in your mail client. No text
> >> message has ever infected a machine without the help of that
> >> machine's user.
>
> >> cmsix
>
> > ========================>
> > And what protection does free antivirus offer when browsing the
> > internet ? Free open source Clam AV has an Outlook plug-in to scan
> > email. But you are only talking about being protected with email
> > scanning. What about browsing ? That is absurd to just use a computer
> > for email - cell phones do that. I have never heard of such a thing
> > that someone pays up to and over 2 thousand dollars for a computer and
> > then not use it because free antivirus only scans email. Strange
> > answer.
>
> Ehh, If you don't mind me asking, what makes you think free antivirus
> only scans email? Most resident antivirus scans files after
> creation/during, when opening, before execution etc. In those cases, if
> the malware is known to the scanner, it should flag it and provide you
> some options for dealing with it, depending on your setup.
>
> --
> Dustin Cook
> Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - v2.2a
> email: bughunter.dus...@gmail.com.removethis
> web..:http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
> Pad..:http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==================================>
Ehhh... yourself.

That's absurd - where in the hell did you get that at ? The whole
message I wrote was about antivirus heurisitics for browsing the
internet.....

You wrote:
""QUOTE""
> Ehh, If you don't mind me asking, what makes you think free antivirus
> only scans email?
""UNQUOTE""
Perhaps you are talking abou the magazine editor comments?

Could you quote this ?..... waiting.