Text 12117, 81 rader
Skriven 2005-10-28 15:36:00 av CHARLES ANGELICH (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av DAN CEPPA
Ärende: AVG Question
====================

123c7e691dbd
win95



Hello Dan - 

CA>>> every day for some time afterwards. It _felt_ as though
CA>>> something was wrong and they were trying to 'patch' it
CA>>> using the update function. 

DC>>  Shades of the MS system they are trying to protect! 

CA>> I would've preferred a new release with a new version
CA>> number if I had a choice in the matter. 

DC> I recently gotten another full 'need to reboot' AVG update
DC> for the XP machine. Nothing yet on the WIN98 system... 

I didn't like AVAST here but if there is a version for W98
maybe you should temporarilly uninstall AVG and install AVAST? 

CA>>> damage. Virus writing for _some_ was just a 'nudge' to
CA>>> make you aware that you weren't "invulnerable" and should
CA>>> clean up your setup. :-) 

DC>> It used to be fun and games. It's gone far beyound that. :(
DC>>  

CA>> It was just a matter of time. Recently some who were
CA>> caught have admitted they were paid to write the virus and
CA>> perform DoS attacks on various websites. Now that there is
CA>> money in the game things will only get worse.

DC> I have this feeling that some programers for av software are
DC> there to write viruses to get by other av programs'
DC> security! 

Microsoft used to cripple competitor's software and I'm sure
there have been others caught in the act. I don't know if an
individual programmer would risk being prosecuted for the
benefit of his company but I understand where you are coming
from. 

I would say that at some point if virus had not been invented
then those comtemplating selling anti-virus software would've
invented them or at least contributed the necessary information
for others to invent them. There always have been people who
like to spread information that has no positive application but
could be used to cause problems. Disgruntled employees using
timed-release code to trash the companies servers and things
like that. 

I do feel that "false positives" are allowed to exist for the
benefit of those selling anti-virus software. It helps sales
and they can always claim they were being "overly cautious" and
got tripped up. The "false positives" are no crime and most
users would agree that being overly cautious is worth the
hassles for them. 

I watched an acquaintance 'fixing' his company's database
software from home more than once standing behind him reading
the screen. He was 'finding' errors in the code so fast I could
barely read the lines of code before he was onto another one.
After my programming experiences I would have to say he PUT
those errors there else there was _no_way_ he could have found
them that fast. It made him look good to the company but they
didn't see how familiar he was with the location of these
'errors'. 

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>     <|                              |>  __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__
 

--- * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.devedia.com/dosghost/
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)