no....
If you don't want to see cross-posting, set a follow-up header (like I've
done).
(Don't bother to reply, I don't read DF, I'm replying in aghlcs.)
in norton, you can click the scheduling button on the left side and then
right click the scan for viruses entry and hit delete event to stop it from
doing the weekly scan
and there are ways that a few viruses can get into your computer even if you
dont open attachments
these viruses are complex but not too numerous, but the most prevalent is
the Wscript.KAKworm
it's actually fairly common, enought so that it is listed on the main page
at symantec's AV page
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
Wscript.KakWorm spreads using Microsoft Outlook Express. It attaches itself
to all outgoing messages using the Signature feature of Outlook Express and
Internet Explorer newsgroup reader.
The worm utilizes a known Microsoft Outlook Express security hole so that a
viral file is created on the system without having to run any attachment.
Simply reading the received email message causes the virus to be placed on
the system.
Microsoft has patched this security hole. The patch is available at:
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
***if you run OE with the preview pane on, the signature will be displayed
and will infect your computer as soon as you recieve your email
norton stopped it for me, but my neighbor got it and i tryed to get rid of,
man was it ever a *** to remove, i'm still not sure if i completely got
rid of it or just ripped the guts out.....
the full description is at
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> > > You're just now realizing this?? Anyway, I used to use McAffee until
it
> > > wanted me to pay for updates. I bought Norton, which was so intrusive
> that
> > I
> > > uninstalled and returned it. There was absolutely no way I could find
to
> > > disable every part of the background stuff. Anyway, I run without any
> > virus
> > > software now. I've only gotten two viruses before, both a lnog time
ago.
> I
> > > am very cautious about such things so I really don't ahve much to
fear.
> > now this is a serious question here
> > are you just plain stupid?
> > virus software needs to be "intrusive", if it doesnt take control of
your
> > system, viruses will, so you put the virus software in control first and
> it
> > handles it
TP
Its not a virus, it's a worm. They aren't the same thing.
It isnt all that hard to get rid of. I have purged several people's
computers of this pesky thing. Guess what? I dont have it, never had it,
and won't get it.
What I do have is all the system resources that NAV is wasting on your
'puter.
~daxe
Dave
Anyway, the yearly fee seems equitable and reasonable to me. They have
quite a lab setup on this stuff. And your idea that they are sponsoring or
even making viri is ludicrous. It would be discovered eventually, and the
legal exposure would make the risk not worthwhile.
Business is business, and the bottom line makes those decisions. And risk
is factored in.
I think you are just bitter that you have to pay for a product that someone
else put their time and sweat into. If that's the case, why don't you write
your own viri package, keep it updated, and you'll be able to have the
updates for free as long as you like.
Get real, and stop ***ing about paying for product that someone else is
producing and researching to save YOU time and money.
> > First of all, your post is off topic.
> > Second of all, these programs were NEVER free to begin with. You were
> > allowed to download an EVALUATION copy of the software under the
agreement
> > that you would PAY FOR the product if you kept using it; otherwise you
> were
> > obliged to REMOVE it from your system once the evaluation period
expired.
> > The fact that you ignored this rule and continued to update your virus
> > definitions for an extended period of time without paying for a product
> that
> > was obviously of value to you is testament to your desire for a free
> lunch.
> > Well guess what, there AIN'T no such thing as a free lunch, and now
you're
> > being asked to pony up your WAY OVERDUE share of the costs associated
with
> > developing the product.
> > My suggestion is to pay the subscription fee and get on with your life.
> > TZ
You got a one year subscription for free, wtf are you whining about?
Henke
I couldn't help noticing that you (also) run OE5.5, i'm sure it wouldn't be
any trouble diging up a file that would run itself just by you looking at
it. And don't come with that shit that you don't open unknown files with
attachments, with some bad luck it's the only mail you recived since last
time you checked your mail and that way OE opens it for ya.
Trust me, get a antivirus program(i use Norton 2001 and are happy with it
after 3 months) and set it up properly. It's better to be safe then sorry,
i'm sure that alot of people in these 5 groups agrees with me.
Henke
| > It's not good to accuse an anti-virus company of making viruses
themselves
| > unless you have a shred of evidence to support such accusations.
| Otherwise
| > it's BS. Those companies are not stupid enough to try ***like that.
| > Often the creators of those viruses are caught and often face real jail
| time
| > and very hefty fines. Do you think they wouldn't spill the beans on
| Norton
<snipped>
*****************
It does make me wonder, especially since a couple of years ago, a Symantec
employee was caught making viruses....
George
> Anyway, the yearly fee seems equitable and reasonable to me. They have
> quite a lab setup on this stuff. And your idea that they are sponsoring
or
> even making viri is ludicrous. It would be discovered eventually, and the
> legal exposure would make the risk not worthwhile.
> Business is business, and the bottom line makes those decisions. And risk
> is factored in.
> I think you are just bitter that you have to pay for a product that
someone
> else put their time and sweat into. If that's the case, why don't you
write
> your own viri package, keep it updated, and you'll be able to have the
> updates for free as long as you like.
> Get real, and stop ***ing about paying for product that someone else is
> producing and researching to save YOU time and money.
> > I HAVE paid for Norton awhile back. And I had paid for McAfee too. But
at
> > our company, McAfee is causing all hell with SMS and other programs, so
we
> > won't be with them for long. What I am saying, is that in years past,
ALL
> > virus definition files were FREE. Now, they are a PAID
SUBSCRIPTION???!!!!
> > We would NOT need this ***on our systems, which most of the time
causes
> > problems and slowdowns ANYWAY, if someone didn't keep creating them. And
> so
> > who do you think wants to make MONEY? The hacker, or the A/V companies?
> > Thus, who do you think really DOES create the new viruses?
> > > First of all, your post is off topic.
> > > Second of all, these programs were NEVER free to begin with. You were
> > > allowed to download an EVALUATION copy of the software under the
> agreement
> > > that you would PAY FOR the product if you kept using it; otherwise you
> > were
> > > obliged to REMOVE it from your system once the evaluation period
> expired.
> > > The fact that you ignored this rule and continued to update your virus
> > > definitions for an extended period of time without paying for a
product
> > that
> > > was obviously of value to you is testament to your desire for a free
> > lunch.
> > > Well guess what, there AIN'T no such thing as a free lunch, and now
> you're
> > > being asked to pony up your WAY OVERDUE share of the costs associated
> with
> > > developing the product.
> > > My suggestion is to pay the subscription fee and get on with your
life.
> > > TZ