How to determine if Spector Pro Spyware is running on my computer?

[Kayman]

On Wed, 21 May 2008 01:48:40 +0200, Sebastian G. wrote:

> G. Morgan wrote:
>
>> [alt.internet.wireless] removed from x-post
>>
>> Sebastian G. wrote:
>>
>>>> Ahh Sebastian, I've read your stuff. Your the one who thinks a clean
>>>> re-install is the only way to remove crapware, eh?
>>>
>>> Not if you have a decent backup. At any rate, this is not a matter of
>>> opinions, but simple scientific facts.
>>
>> Well I would have to argue that it *is* a matter of opinion. I have
>> personally resurrected many a machine from the brink of uselessness by
>> applying (freeware) solutions.
>
> No, you didn't. In fact, it's likely that they're still compromised.
>
>> The one-two punch of Adaware, and SpyBot S&D
>> is often all it takes to clean an infected PC.
>
> Gotta laugh even more. These tools are absolutely useless, since even at
> perfectly clean machines they're claiming a lot of nonsense. How should they
> even provide any useful information about a system that actively lies to them?

Now, even if a certain Sebastian Gottschalk from .de is spewing snipes
proclaiming that using David's Multi-AV to clean operating systems isn't is
accord with (his) scientific facts...the pragmatic/realistic proof is in
the pudding. Users living in the Islands, Booneys, Bush, Outback, Beyond
the Black Stump etc. don't need your claptrap and don't care for your
condescending manner. As a frequent lurker in various pertinent newsgroups,
I haven't seen one post where David's Multi-AV wasn't helpful and
beneficial.

So, Sebastian Gottschalk of .de, go and stick your scientific facts in one
of your bodily cavities, save us from your snipes and keep your
grandiosities within the circle of your associates in the sophisticated
milieu of Berlin. (You are a prime example of German arrogance but your
like minded buckos wouldn't know, now would they?).

[Sebastian G.]

Kayman wrote:

> isn't is accord with (his) scientific facts...

^^^^^
Proof that you're an idiot.

> the pragmatic/realistic proof is in the pudding.


There is none. You cannot proof that you've cleaned the system just by the
absence of obvious signs.


> I haven't seen one post where David's Multi-AV wasn't helpful and
> beneficial.


Of course, since those fools don't understand the meaning of system
integrity. It was helpful insofar that it seemed to cure the symptoms, but
it never restored the system to a well-defined state, leaving all future
work unreliable and potentially compromised.

[Kayman]

On Wed, 21 May 2008 03:48:01 +0200, Sebastian G. wrote:

> Kayman wrote:
>
>> isn't is accord with (his) scientific facts...
>
> ^^^^^
> Proof that you're an idiot.

Ah, So typical and predictable. You must be running out of arguments.

>> the pragmatic/realistic proof is in the pudding.
>
> There is none. You cannot proof that you've cleaned the system just by the
> absence of obvious signs.
>
Sure, yadda, yadda, yawn.
>
>> I haven't seen one post where David's Multi-AV wasn't helpful and
>> beneficial.
>
> Of course, since those fools don't understand the meaning of system
> integrity.

I only wish you'd meet some of them Outback "fools" face to face...

> It was helpful insofar that it seemed to cure the symptoms, but
> it never restored the system to a well-defined state, leaving all future
> work unreliable and potentially compromised.

Now we know. To quote H.L.Mencken:"Puritanism: The haunting fear that
someone, somewhere, may be happy."

[Sebastian G.]

Kayman wrote:

> On Wed, 21 May 2008 03:48:01 +0200, Sebastian G. wrote:
>
>> Kayman wrote:
>>
>>> isn't is accord with (his) scientific facts...
>> ^^^^^
>> Proof that you're an idiot.
>
> Ah, So typical and predictable. You must be running out of arguments.


Another proof that you're an idiot. You're claiming trivial scientific facts
as solely my facts, which is exactly your lack of arguments.


>> There is none. You cannot proof that you've cleaned the system just by the
>> absence of obvious signs.
>>
> Sure, yadda, yadda, yawn.


Yet another proof that you're lacking arguments.

>> Of course, since those fools don't understand the meaning of system
>> integrity.
>
> I only wish you'd meet some of them Outback "fools" face to face...


I do. And interestingly most of them know what they're doing wrong, and
typically beg for the consequences not happening.

>> It was helpful insofar that it seemed to cure the symptoms, but
>> it never restored the system to a well-defined state, leaving all future
>> work unreliable and potentially compromised.
>
> Now we know. To quote H.L.Mencken:"Puritanism: The haunting fear that
> someone, somewhere, may be happy."


If you would bother to understand what an universal trojan horse is (and
feel ashame that you ever dared operating a computer without the most basic
knowledge), then you might get a clue where to place reasonable assumptions.
A compromised system, by definition, remains compromised until it returns
into a well-defined state. Changing the state based on assumptions about the
current state can't achieve that. But well, that's just trivial math...

[Kayman]

On Wed, 21 May 2008 11:22:41 +0200, Sebastian G. wrote:

> Kayman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 03:48:01 +0200, Sebastian G. wrote:
>>
>>> Kayman wrote:
>>>
>>>> isn't is accord with (his) scientific facts...
>>> ^^^^^
>>> Proof that you're an idiot.
>>
>> Ah, So typical and predictable. You must be running out of arguments.
>
> Another proof that you're an idiot. You're claiming trivial scientific facts
> as solely my facts, which is exactly your lack of arguments.
>
You don't have to be so hostile if you feel the post is not suitable to
your tastes. You seem to be susceptible to the attitudes, feelings, or
circumstances of others. Try to keep your emotions in check; You would
screw up the context of anything for your purpose of argument. Not an
intelligent approach.
You arrogant, pretentious and condescending swine.
>
>>> There is none. You cannot proof that you've cleaned the system just by the
>>> absence of obvious signs.
>>>
>> Sure, yadda, yadda, yawn.
>
> Yet another proof that you're lacking arguments.

Well, you're not very original. You're so full of **** I doubt any of your
bodily cavity are functioning (this explains why you can't stick your
useless messages anywhere and continue polluting newsgroups).
"You half-witted insignificant gob of rancid mucus."
(Courtesy: the good people from Monty Python).

>>> Of course, since those fools don't understand the meaning of system
>>> integrity.
>>>
>> I only wish you'd meet some of them Outback "fools" face to face...
> I do. And interestingly most of them know what they're doing wrong, and
> typically beg for the consequences not happening.
>
LOL, I just feel off the oil drum I'm sitting on. Any true self-respecting
outback person would rip off your head and **** in your neck!
You probably met somebody called Herr or Frau Kraut living in the 'Wannsee'
area which you as Berlin Insulaner consider JWD or janz weit draussen.
(For the non-Krauts; Wannsee = a lake in the Berlin area, Insulaner =
referred to the denizens of Berlin due to the isolation caused during the
early stages of the cold war, janz weit draussen = beyond the black stump
or outback).

>>> It was helpful insofar that it seemed to cure the symptoms, but
>>> it never restored the system to a well-defined state, leaving all future
>>> work unreliable and potentially compromised.
>>
>> Now we know. To quote H.L.Mencken:"Puritanism: The haunting fear that
>> someone, somewhere, may be happy."
>
> If you would bother to understand what an universal trojan horse is (and
> feel ashame that you ever dared operating a computer without the most basic
> knowledge), then you might get a clue where to place reasonable assumptions.
> A compromised system, by definition, remains compromised until it returns
> into a well-defined state. Changing the state based on assumptions about the
> current state can't achieve that. But well, that's just trivial math...

Rubbish (see my previous post in this thread)!
What *you* don't understand is that Berlin ain't the center of the
universe. Herr Adolph didn't succeed nor will you.

The reason non-technical people listing their problems in (pertinent)
newsgroups is because they're crying out for help and guidance; Something
you never ever provide except hideous snipes, insults and encrypted
remarks. The good people residing/working in remote areas don't need your
empty rhetoric; They are mostly working with limited resources. All they
care about to get their machine running again and that's where David's
Multi-AV *is* the next best thing to re-install the OS [PERIOD]!
They don't give damn about your overbearing bunk because it's just not
feasible for them to do anything more 'sophisticated'. Flattening/wiping
the HDD and re-installing the OS would most probably shut them off from the
rest of the world for good or at least until professional help is
available, which in some instances could take many months.

Heck, to the horror of some German car mechanics ("das geht doch nicht" -
"you can't do that"), we used bananas to "lubricate" the gearbox of our VW
bus which kept us going to the next garage which was about 2000 miles away.
If it was up to those morons we'd still be in the middle of nowhere
(Africa).

[John Mason Jr]

Kayman wrote:
<snip>
> The reason non-technical people listing their problems in (pertinent)
> newsgroups is because they're crying out for help and guidance; Something
> you never ever provide except hideous snipes, insults and encrypted
> remarks. The good people residing/working in remote areas don't need your
> empty rhetoric; They are mostly working with limited resources. All they
> care about to get their machine running again and that's where David's
> Multi-AV *is* the next best thing to re-install the OS [PERIOD]!
> They don't give damn about your overbearing bunk because it's just not
> feasible for them to do anything more 'sophisticated'. Flattening/wiping
> the HDD and re-installing the OS would most probably shut them off from the
> rest of the world for good or at least until professional help is
> available, which in some instances could take many months.
>
<snip>


SG normally raises the same point, and you might not like it but it is
true.

If a machine has been compromised/infected, and you rely on signature
based cleaning/detection methods then you cannot be sure you are not
still compromised.

The correct way to recover is to restore from known good media, and then
make sure that you patch the vulnerability that allowed the compromise
in the first place

If you accept the risk that you may still be compromised then go ahead
and use signature based solutions.


John

[David H. Lipman]

From: "John Mason Jr" <notvalid@cox.net.invalid>


| <snip>
|
| SG normally raises the same point, and you might not like it but it is
| true.
|
| If a machine has been compromised/infected, and you rely on signature
| based cleaning/detection methods then you cannot be sure you are not
| still compromised.
|
| The correct way to recover is to restore from known good media, and then
| make sure that you patch the vulnerability that allowed the compromise
| in the first place
|
| If you accept the risk that you may still be compromised then go ahead
| and use signature based solutions.
|
| John
|

First you have to define "compramised".

Is a system compramised if you have a Gain/Gator malware infection or NYB virus on a FAT32
based system ?


--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

[Kayman]

On Thu, 22 May 2008 11:28:12 -0400, John Mason Jr wrote:

> Kayman wrote:
> <snip>
>> The reason non-technical people listing their problems in (pertinent)
>> newsgroups is because they're crying out for help and guidance; Something
>> you never ever provide except hideous snipes, insults and encrypted
>> remarks. The good people residing/working in remote areas don't need your
>> empty rhetoric; They are mostly working with limited resources. All they
>> care about to get their machine running again and that's where David's
>> Multi-AV *is* the next best thing to re-install the OS [PERIOD]!
>> They don't give damn about your overbearing bunk because it's just not
>> feasible for them to do anything more 'sophisticated'. Flattening/wiping
>> the HDD and re-installing the OS would most probably shut them off from the
>> rest of the world for good or at least until professional help is
>> available, which in some instances could take many months.
>>
> <snip>
>
>
> SG normally raises the same point, and you might not like it but it is
> true.
>
> If a machine has been compromised/infected, and you rely on signature
> based cleaning/detection methods then you cannot be sure you are not
> still compromised.
>
> The correct way to recover is to restore from known good media, and then
> make sure that you patch the vulnerability that allowed the compromise
> in the first place
>
> If you accept the risk that you may still be compromised then go ahead
> and use signature based solutions.
>

John,
Please read (or re-read) my post dated 20-May-08 10:28:12PM in this thread
:-)