Antivirus

[Archangel]

What do you consider to be the best antivurus program out there?

I ask this because i'm using McAfee total protection and the viruses just keep coming in so I'm looking for a new one

I'm thinking panda antivirus, it's been advised to me b4 but i've never tried it

Maybe i should also download ad-aware?

[Buffalobiian]

This ain't from personal experience, but from what I've read, the best one out there would be NOD32 AV by ESET. Very fast, and high detection rate. They've also streamlined the interface in their newest versions so to make it more usable for the general public. (Completely internet security suit is also available).

They're expensive though. Kaspersky is on about the same level. Slower scans though, but possibly easier interface to work with.

Side note- I'm addicted to ZoneAlarm. Not because of the firewall (heck, I don't think I need it here), but because of the red and green traffic indicators. I need to know what and how much traffic's going out.

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/4632/33054144ni3.jpg

[Ryllharu]

Kapersky: Strongest free/trial antivirus with best catch rate, larger system footprint. Often catches stuff you know for a fact is not a virus (incl. some legitimate programs), hence the "best" catch rate. Overdoes it.

Avast: Currently the best of the free antivirus programs, moderate footprint, good protection, ad supported, loud and noisy (but all of the sounds can be disabled)

Panda: I have had pretty bad experiences with this antivirus, but it is good for really out of date systems that can't handle the newer ones.

AVG Free: A little heavy at times, the more useful scheduling only in pro edition, version 8 took a light, free quality antivirus and made it oppressive and bloated. Not recommeded anymore.

(ESET) NOD32: Lightest system footprint for strong antivirus protection it provides, good catch rate, excellent database of viruses, expensive license (60 USD).

F-Secure: Good antivirus paired with a powerful firewall. Has found a lot of things the trial/free antivirus programs couldn't. Larger system footprint. Still couldn't find the nasty self-replicators though when I used it.

Symantec: Bloated, mediocre catch rate, severely overpriced, mediocre firewall (ZoneAlarm is free and does better), huge system hog. Drain on your computer, waste in your wallet.

McAfee: Mediocre, smaller system drain than Symantec, but worse catch rate.

[Archangel]

Btw price is not a problem here since i'm not gonna pay for it anyway...

[itadakimasu]

we have symantec enterprise at work and apparently it sucks because i've had to manually delete 2-3 annoying spyware/virus in the past 3 or 4 weeks.

one was kind of interesting, the owner had somehow not gotten any updates for well over a year and she had this irc bot virus running on her system and had her logged into a #sex channel, which was a great conversation piece w\ the owner of the company i work for.

[Ryllharu]

Btw price is not a problem here since i'm not gonna pay for it anyway...
If price is not an option (very rare in conversations about anti-virus clients) don't even think about it. Get NOD32.

[Dark Dragon]

NOD32 is indeed the best Anti-virus software on the list, I've using it for 3 years and it hasn't fail me yet. One thing to note though, NOD32 is not the best at catching spyware or malware so it might be wise to get a good anti-spyware if you plan to use it.

[Archangel]

So i got ESET NOD32 Antivirus and it has worked great so far but i'm worried that it doesn't come with a firewall, i'm currently using windows' firewall.

Any advice on what i should get for a firewall? I'm looking for something good but that doesn't bother me much with settings and memory usage.

[Buffalobiian]

So i got ESET NOD32 Antivirus and it has worked great so far but i'm worried that it doesn't come with a firewall, i'm currently using windows' firewall.

Any advice on what i should get for a firewall? I'm looking for something good but that doesn't bother me much with settings and memory usage.

Do you have a router or a modem router with either NAT or SPI firewall. All modern and good (ie, not some cheap brand your ISP might endorse) should have it. If you do, it's not so important, since hardware firewalls block pretty much all types of entries anyway.

If you want a free firewall, I'd recommend Zone Alarm. It's not "light" per se, it's using 55MB or RAM right now (Internet suit edition). I've never tried any other firewall, so I don't know how they rate on the energy scale.

As for settings, I've always put mine on "ask me about everything", so whenever a program changes on an update or when you install something new, you'd get quite a few alerts until you teach it what to do about them. There's a learning mode which I've never used, but it monitors your computer and "learns" about what it should bother you about.

Main reason I'm using it is because I used it in the past, and I'm addicted to reading how much and what kind of traffic is entering/leaving my system. (The little icon in the sys tray has upload (red) and download (green) bars to show this)

Anyway, see what all the other guys have to say, since I've never tried other software firewalls to give an overall picture.

(Reiterate: If you've got a hardware firewalled router, the software one is only useful for blocking LAN peers or people on an unsecured wireless network. Windows Firewall does a good enough job at that. I'm only using mine for the bars. :D)

And I'm jealous you've got NOD32 :o

[Xelbair]

From what i know, NOD32 is not so good, it integrates too much with OS, but its really light and decent pc can handle scan and smooth high-end game.
Kaspersky/Gdata Antiviruskit(its kaspersky and other scanner integrated together) are too sensitive, and detect some stuff that are not viruses.
AVG, it's pretty good, but you know - it was better before some updates.

As i see you suggest nod32, well it failed me 4 times... in a row. and 3 of 4 times i hadn't got a system disc image backup.

For secure firewall i suggest any hardware firewall(router).

My last advice is - make 2 partitions, system one(like 20gb) and the rest, and just after installing windows do disc backup(clonezilla is free open source tool for this), and after installing drivers do another backup. then you got one backup in case you upgreade your hardware(fresh install), and the backup for restoring in case of viruses, because they mostly infect system disc. After that i suggest to scan your drivers with some anti-virus and anti-spyware software(great collection of disk img, anti-spyware/cirus and other tools is called "Hiren's Boot CD" <- just record one on CD-RW).

[Dark Dragon]

From what i know, NOD32 is not so good, it integrates too much with OS, but its really light and decent pc can handle scan and smooth high-end game.
Kaspersky/Gdata Antiviruskit(its kaspersky and other scanner integrated together) are too sensitive, and detect some stuff that are not viruses.
AVG, it's pretty good, but you know - it was better before some updates.

As i see you suggest nod32, well it failed me 4 times... in a row. and 3 of 4 times i hadn't got a system disc image backup.

For secure firewall i suggest any hardware firewall(router).

My last advice is - make 2 partitions, system one(like 20gb) and the rest, and just after installing windows do disc backup(clonezilla is free open source tool for this), and after installing drivers do another backup. then you got one backup in case you upgreade your hardware(fresh install), and the backup for restoring in case of viruses, because they mostly infect system disc. After that i suggest to scan your drivers with some anti-virus and anti-spyware software(great collection of disk img, anti-spyware/cirus and other tools is called "Hiren's Boot CD" <- just record one on CD-RW).

NOD32 fail you 4 times in a row? wow that's pretty amazing in a sense.

I'm curious as to how this happened.

do you use Firefox or Internet explorer for your web browser? These 4 failures in a row, was that over a long period of time or just a short one like say under 6 months?

[The Heretic Azazel]

NOD32 has never failed me, very reliable.


And I'm jealous you've got NOD32

Can we stop acting like he's not pirating this program? Money isn't an option for him for a reason.

[Buffalobiian]

Can we stop acting like he's not pirating this program? Money isn't an option for him for a reason.

...yeah, possible. Or maybe family may be paying for it, and just got him to find out which is the best. Who knows.

I've read somewhere that getting VB100 awards doesn't accurately reflect real-life performance and security. That's as far as I understood though. VB100 awards is what ESET boasts most about NOD32.

On the other hand, I've had a friend who lived at my place who had Kaspersky, and I never heard of him getting a false positive. AVG on the other hand, has give me several. One time it thought Zone Alarm was a worm :p

@Archie: I forgot if I answered your question before about wireless internet connection, so I'll address it again.

A) If you use a wireless internet connection, ie no phone cables, connection is on air, that's no different than a normal internet connection regarding security. As long as the modem/router's got a hardware firewall, you're covered from internet invaders. If you're unsure, check the model on the brand's website. You can always post the model number here if you're still lost.

B) If you use a wireless LAN connection, ie no cable connects your computer to the router/modem, you should still be fine as long as the router's firewalled, and you've got WPA or better as your wireless encryption (WEP does NOT count, you can download tools designed to hack WEP in no time).

What a software firewall would help you with is against other people on your LAN, or for example, if you frequent airports with unsecured Wi-Fi. However, if you plan to use a firewall for your home network as a a protection against hacking, hardware firewalls are all you'll need.

Hardware firewall

To qualify for sufficient hardware firewall protection, it should provide the following:

1) NAT (Network Address Translation) security - To the people on the internet, your router is the only computer that's accessing the internet. It's got an external IP that others can see. Every bit of data is sent to the router as if it's the computer that requested it. That's the case whether you have 1, 2 or 50 users at home sharing the internet.

What your router does is act as its own IP server (aka DCHP server), and gives out internal/LAN IPs to people in the house. All the information received from the internet is interpreted by the router. It figures out which computer sent or requested the data, and bounces it to the relevant local computer.

Basically, with a NAT firewall, others on the internet should not be able to see you directly, as your router rewrites all the packet headers of your computer before it lets them out. Your local IP only works for local computers, and from the outside, it seems like your router is the sole computer doing all the activity.

If you don't have NAT, or disabled it, people can see your computer directly. You should then get a software firewall.

2) SPI (stateful packet inspection) feature: SPI functions as a check for packets handled by the router. In short, it checks for packets to see if they belong to a valid session. For example, if you're browsing Gotwoot, it sees packets from associated with forums.gotwoot.net as legitimate, since the user accessed it. Meanwhile, if a hacker decided to have a go at you, his packets, originating from 203.197.X.X on someISP.com.jp, it would not be legitimate, since your session/activity has nothing to do with that address. Your router discards the packets. Note: SPI firewall checks for packets according to a valid session, not content.

You should have both SPI and NAT enabled, unless you've got a crap router, or you've got special circumstances. In that case you should know what you're doing :p

Additional info: DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) is another method used by firewalls. These firewalls don't check for where the packet came from, (that's what SPI firewall's for), but rather, scans the packets for content. In that sense, it's more for antivirus/antispyware protection, as it checks for malicious content.

DPI isn't required for anti-hacking functionality. SPI and NAT are what you should check for.

And since you use a wireless LAN (I'm assuming)

Wireless LAN security

Things you should be aware of:

1) Encryption: I've gone over this before. In short, use WPA or WPA2. Don't even bother with WEP, of any strength. I'll go through why after I've explained the rest.

2) hidden SSID: A hidden SSID means your wireless your wireless network doesn't show up when you (or other people) perform a "scan for local wireless networks" action. You need to know the name to get it. However, this feature is easily compromised with a packet sniffer. If you use WPA, this protection is insignificant. Use it simply for the sake of it, and so people don't know the wireless network exists (for non-hackers), so you've still got some sort of security left if you needed to disable WPA temporarily. However, some things don't like hidden SSIDs. From experience, Vista keeps disconnecting when I used it.

3) MAC address filtering: Router checks the MAC address of devices connected, and only allows connections from valid machines. Again, easily compromised with a packet sniffer. All it takes is to monitor the wireless activity, see which MAC address are "valid", then copy and paste it as your (hacker's) network card, and "tada", you're suddenly valid. Again, this shouldn't matter if you've got WPA.

Bottom line: If you've got WPA/2, that's all you'll need. Features 2 and 3 are insignificant, and are more an inconvenience than a protection.

If you've got old hardware, and can only use WEP (happens if you've only got 802.11b), then enable MAC address filtering, make your SSID invisible, and leave the network unencrypted.

MAC filtering and hidden SSID will be enough to ward off any curious neighbours and non-hackers. Anybody good/smart enough/pissed off enough to read up how to get past both these should know how to break WEP in under half an hour anyway, so just disabled WEP for added performance. (You'll need it if you've still got 802.11b)

You probably knew all that already Archie, but I was bored, so.....:p

To check your protection against hacking, go to Shields Up (https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?bh0bkyd2), and perform a test for "all service ports"





I second Xelbair's partitioning method. Lots of users who've had serious virus problems use that. I've heard of a slight variation though:

Partition 1: system files AND program files

Rational: virus tend to infect system files and C:\documents and settings\User files. However, programs install themselves into system subfolders too, and some won't work if you've restored a backup prior to your program install. Installing both into one partition and backing up both works around this problem.

Problem is, of course, it only works like this until you've filled up that partition. So if you've underestimated your max usage, or simply installed that much stuff, you'll have to install stuff to a second partition, and the problem arises again.

Partition 2: Data/Media and My Documents

A separate partition for your media files as well as a place to store all your documents. As the name suggests, users who use this method store all their personal files (my documents, my pictures etc) here instead of the default under C:\. This is so you can restore your Parition 1 without wiping out all your important stuff.

[Xelbair]

Those failures were in really short time range(like 1 week), and i use firefox since 5 years ago.
I totaly agree with Bill, never under any circumstances use wep. peroid.
As for saving data on partitions, if your pc gets infected, just go into safe mode and copy important stuff on other partition. I'm lucky guy - even in case my pc wont boot i can plug my disc onto one of my parent's pc or my friend's one(1 floor lower than me) and move my data.
For programs to prefer to install them on my data partition/separate partition. most of them works without reg keys so i wont have to reinstall them, only exceptions to this rule are IM(not worth saving imo) and programs that require reg keys to run(3ds max etc).

[Buffalobiian]

Okay, read up on some more info.

VB100 tests for old, or known viruses and their variants. Basically, it tests for AV database and signature based testing. AVs that have an excellent database, such as NOD32, excel at these tests. Engines based on heuristics, not so.

In other words, VB100 tests test for one area of virus detection technology, but by no means translates solely to real life security performance.

Tests that chuck a bazillion samples of varying types of malware, regardless of detection method, should give a more accurate picture of real-life virus detection capability.

Latest results from such tests:

AV-tests (http://www.virusbtn.com/news/2008/09_02)

AV-Comparative (http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2008_08.php)

I'm trying to decide myself whether to stay on my AVG-free or go back to the Zone Alarm antivirus on my ZA Internet Suit. From what I know, it's running a version of the Kaspersky 6 SDK engine. Not quite as good as their current one, but better than the current AVG possibly.

But then I'll have to read up on all the issues the latest ZA client has :(
(Last time I switched on ZA's antivirus ~2 years ago, the hourly update keep stealing your focus, which is just plain stupid when you're playing games. I don't know if they've fixed this issue yet.)

[Buffalobiian]

I'm trying to do a bit of research myself, trying to pick one of these options:

1) AVG free - currently using

2) Antivir free + Spyware Doctor Starter edition

3) ZoneAlarm Internet Security.

I've already got ZA, just that I've disabled the AV for AVG since 2 years ago, Mind you, back then ZA was using the CA antivirus, which is quite an appalling AV app. The current ZA antivirus engine is a built on the Kaspersky SDK, so it's slightly inferior in therms of functionality, but not definitions. (Still, it translates to a smidget lower hit percentage).

What's making it hard is everybody's reviewing the paid versions, people assume ZA's AV is my Kaspersky, so "it must be the same", while others just don't have any credibility at all.

[Munsu]

AVG 8 is bad with Vista, if you have Vista.

[Buffalobiian]

XP-32bit here, but I'll keep that in mind. Thanks.

[Munsu]

I haven't tried AVG 8 with XP, only the earlier version. But with Vista, AVG 8 does some shit that prevents you from downloading. It does the full download, but then erases the file for some reason.

This also happened recently:
http://www.dailytech.com/Update+AVG+Virus+Scanner+Accidentally+Removes+Crit ical+Windows+Component/article13407.htm

[Buffalobiian]

Interesting. I guess I'm lucky they fixed it by the time mine did a daily update. Then again, I tell it to ask me about everything. I happened to miss the OS 2.49? update for the PS3 as well, which had something like a 50% chance of bricking your PS3 once installed.

I've found a few useful tools for those who want to cross-reference suspicious files, or check for false positives:

Many commercial AV companies these days host file scanners on their websites for free, like ESET or Kaspersky, but with these you're only testing it against one source, let alone the tiny filesize limits, 1MB in Kaspersky's case.

So here's some alternatives:

http://virusscan.jotti.org/
-10MB limit, scans files against ~20 commercial antivirus engines and generates a report immediately after upload. Definitions updated hourly

If the 10MB limit is giving you a headache, attach your file and send it to scan@virustotal.com, making sure you put the word SCAN in the subject header. Results will be emailed back, with response time varying with server load. Files larger than 20MB will be rejected.

[Xelbair]

it was PS3 2.5 update - it did not brick my ps3 and worked well.

[Jman]

Hey guys thanks for the recommendations in this thread. As my main av ran out I decided to try out another, before shelling out the $ for another renewal. Anyhow I used nod32 and it worked out well from the install till now, that the trial period is over, I'm going to give Kaspersky a trial. One issue I faced while attempting to install is an incompatible program message. What gives? I've always used spybot s&d and it's never conflicted with any other apps I've ran and I really don't want to uninstall it only to reinstall after 30days.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v380/animem/AV.jpg
Guess I'll try my luck with Avast.

[Buffalobiian]

Guess I'll try my luck with Avast.
I've switched over from AVG to AVAST two weeks ago.

Advantage of Avast compared to AVG:
-Higher catch rate in both antivirus and (especially) antispyware capability (reports only, not from personal experience)
-More tweakable scanning parameters - can change sensitivity etc
-More resident shield modules
-File database update utility
-Updates more frequently, every 4hrs is default.
-Free version has root-kit detection

Disadvantages of Avast vs AVG
-GUI is bad
-Much slower scanner
-More tweakable scanners/options
-More resident shield modules.
-More false positives (highest settings - not from personal experience)

Impressions:
Avast is probably the best free antivirus/antispyware solution out there. Avira scores a touch better in virus detection rate, but comes with no antispyware. You can try to patch up that weakness with something like Spyware Doctor Starter Edition, but news that it only downloads selected detection signatures raises question to its effectiveness.

So in terms of detection rate, Avast is definitely a good antimalware consideration.
That said, Avast on the highest settings can also turn up more false positives than AVG, though I haven't personally encountered any, and AVG is known to be high in FPs anyway.

A major drawback of Avast is its slow on-demand scanner. I repeat, SLOOOW. On the highest sensitivity, it took hours (I lost track of how many, maybe 3) to scan my computer (XP, Intel 2.4GHz Duo, 250GB HDD -70% full). It slows down the rig for the entire scan, but CPU usage never peaks above 40% usage (usually much less). I don't know why that is. AVG runs on 100% CPU and gets it done under an hour. You'll only need to scan once though, since after the comp is cleaned, the resident shield should keep all the bugs out.

Theoretically, that is.

Avast is also a whole lot more customisable in terms of scanning parameters, sensitivity, and all the other tweakable little bits. That's to be expected from a company that wishes to bring household owners a full-powered AV product, as opposed to AVG and a cut-down version. The resident shield is also split into 7 components, allowing more control over how Avast works.

However, this customisation ability is also a disadvantage of Avast. With limited guidance as to how to set all this up, new users wishing to play with some settings are thrown in the deep end, having to wade through all the ticks and boxes by googling home-made tutorials. Those often tell you what to select and what not to, but not all tell you why.

That leads me to the graphic user interface. In short, it sucks. You don't want to hear the long version. The media player-like interface pissed me off when I first started using computers. 7 years or so down the track, it still does. Luckily, a guy named SZCraftec has made beautiful skins for this contraption, which is a must get for anyone using Avast.

My two favourite skins:
1) aVist- a Vista-like interface. It's got a very familiar feel, no matter which Windows version you use. Buttons are also arranged in a handy manner.

2)Silhouette 4 in 1- a skin based on Avast's website design. Not as familiar to the hand as aVist, but just as elegant to the eye. I'm left wondering why Avast didn't come up with the idea for this one.

One important thing to note is that, for full effectiveness, both AVG and Avast need to be up to date. Neither has a particularly strong heuristics engine, and heavily rely on detection signatures for their virus recognition ability. While Avast, updating 6 times a day, may sound much more sensible, and desirable, than AVG's daily updates. you also have to look at how often updates are released. In that regard, I can not say personally, but google may help you.

Two knew features I noticed when I switched over:
1) Avast's Virus Recovery Database - Avast runs a version check of all your files once every 3 weeks by default to keep a file history. It uses that when repairing infected files to a backward state. It's the first I've heard of this function, so I'm curious as to how other AVs heal infections.

2) Avast's webshield module comes with a local proxy. It was not recommended to activate this feature with my Zone Alarm version, so I turned it off. I have no idea what that does, what protection it offers, or any problems it may cause.

Avast does have its drawbacks especially for non-advanced users. However, a little reading, a little tweaking, and a little GUI change is little sacrifice in knowing you've settled with one of the best anti-malware solutions available.

And of course, it's free!!

[Xelbair]

O god, if i were to scan my 750gb hdd 95% full it would be BAD, meybe my core2quad(2,4 each) would speed it up a bit but still, now there is no way i will change to avast(i scan regularly each weak)

[David75]

O god, if i were to scan my 750gb hdd 95% full it would be BAD, meybe my core2quad(2,4 each) would speed it up a bit but still, now there is no way i will change to avast(i scan regularly each weak)

2 hours something to scan that hd if your system is able to process 100MB/s during the whole time, which is probably not the case.
The problem is the disk/interface speed rather than memory and CPU in your case.

[Xelbair]

i don't remember correctly my disc speed but it was one of best at January this year, Seagate Barracuda if i remember correctly - 32mb cache. Still, i choose AVG for its fast scanning, i would go with nod32 but it integrates too much with OS and it failed me many times.

[Buffalobiian]

I'm sure Avast will scan much faster if you unticked "Scan Archives", and further still if you chose the default "Medium" sensitivity rather than a "Thorough" scan. But yes, it is one of the slower antivirus products I've seen.

I'm just wondering what the bottleneck is, since it's definitely not CPU.

[David75]

I'm sure Avast will scan much faster if you unticked "Scan Archives", and further still if you chose the default "Medium" sensitivity rather than a "Thorough" scan. But yes, it is one of the slower antivirus products I've seen.

I'm just wondering what the bottleneck is, since it's definitely not CPU.

My guess is that some antivirus programs organise the scan so that it is more like a sequential read, rather than a random one. There's a lot of time to gain from that, even more on small files.

[Archangel]

I have Eset Smart Security right now, but i seem to have recently downloaded a bad file while trying to get nero 9.

Will a full system sweep by Eset clear the problems or should i get some more programs like Ad-Aware to help out?

[Buffalobiian]

Depends on what it is. Ad-aware won't help you with viruses. Did Eset pick up the file as bad, or are you seeing the effects of the "bad" file? If the latter, then obviously it didn't pick it up, so unless a definition's been added afterwards through update, it won't identify it.

Just do a full system scan, and play around with some free ones to see if anything's left behind. Reboot in between each scan though, just to check if things are really gone.

[itadakimasu]

spybot has saved the day for me a few times. It's really ironic how we spent over $1,000 renewing our license for symantec endpoint protection @ work and then computers still get infected with crap that it doesn' t find.

Thats when you goto freeware like spybot that actually finds and removes lots of stuff that the other program wont get.

[Buffalobiian]

Thought I'd introduce two little apps for those interested:

1) A-Squared Free

-Free to use antivirus/antispyware/antitrojan etc etc scanner. No resident scanner available in this free version, but otherwise quite a nice, complete product. A simple product, which allows you to update, scan, quarantine and whitelist items. Advance users might not like the lack of customization that can be found in more elaborate products, but this seems to work quite well from the user reviews I've read.

I can't speak for detection rates as I'm new to it myself, and haven't had a virus problem with it.

Official website: http://www.emsisoft.com/en/software/free/
Also available at www.download.com

2) Hijack Free

-Official description: Freeware! HiJackFree helps advanced users to detect and remove Malware manually. With HiJackFree you can manage all active processes, services, drivers, autoruns, open ports, hosts file entries and many more. For your full control over your system.

Both these software interfaces remind me of AVG Antispyware Free, when AVG (still called Grisoft back then) bought out Ewido Antispyware, but before integrating the antispyware function into their other AV/firewall products.

Anybody using AVG Antispyware Free back then would remember how much it sucked when it was no longer supported. AVG Free incorporated the Antispyware function, but left out all the other tidbits like process/ports/service/startup monitoring.

Well all that is back in Hijack Free, available here:
http://www.hijackfree.com/en/

Nice software for those who digg all those free security apps. ;)

------------------------------------------
On a slightly nastier note, anybody here using Avast Home/XP SP2 32bit?

Mine can't seem to scan past the C:/ drive, always stopping somewhere before it gets to my other hard disks. I've used chkdsk /r to check for bad sectors that might be stumping it up, as well as corrupt files etc, but nothing seems to fix it.

It only happens when using the Thorough and Standard scanning profiles. QuickScan, Right-click scan as well as boot-time scan are fine. Reinstalling does not fix the problem.

[Archangel]

Didn't i make a thread for that exact same purpose, Bill :p

[Buffalobiian]

I always look for a thread with a title that matches what I'm trying to say or ask, regardless of what the original intention was. (I mean this in a nice way Archie).

You'll notice that too with some older threads I revived in the past where the topic matched my question, even if the content didn't match.

Similarly, I detest the behaviour of mislabelling threads, or giving vague titles. You see this more in other forums, where there's literally hundreds of "help me!", "I'm a noob", or "I'm looking for an anime but I don't know the name" threads that screw up the search engine, sounds bad, and tells you nothing about the contents.

Having said that, it seems the most appropriate place for my previous post would have been here:

http://forums.gotwoot.net/showthread.php?t=13117

Meh, mods are welcome to move it if they care enough.

[Penner]

Just downloaded and set up ZoneAlarm Free Firewall, and those little red/green traffic bars on the start menu are quite addictive ;P

Edit:

Mhmm. uTorrent crashed and then became unable to shut down in any way, even killing the .exe from processes didnt work so i checked around and apparently ZoneAlarm can cause that shit, so meh, i just uninstalled it again.

Just a heads up if ya'll didnt already know this :P

[Buffalobiian]

Addictive those little traffic lights are :) It's a pity that ZA still doesn't support 64bit systems though.

I've been using ZA for years now, and I haven't had that problem you're talking about with uTorrent, which I've also been using for an equally long time. I've only got ZA Free on my laptop though, which doesn't have uTorrent installed.

On my desktop, I've got the latest non-beta release of uTorrent with an outdated ZA Security (the whole package) software. It's not exactly "proper", so I can't upgrade. Since I don't actually need it for anti-hacking as I've got my router's, I keep it for:

a) the OS firewall, which the free version doesn't have.

b) the Anti-Identity Theft function, which warns you if you're sending any specified passwords/creditcard numbers over a non-secure connection (namely https). Just a little security against key loggers and trojans sending your info out.

c) Those little red and green bars :o

[Penner]

Ah, i do have Windows Vista Ultimate 64bit so that might also cause some issues eh? :P

[Buffalobiian]

That limitation seems to only apply to their free product.


System Requirements for all other ZoneAlarm Products*:
Microsoft&#174; Vista SP1:

* 2 GHz 32-bit or 64-bit processor
* Minimum system RAM: 2 GB (32-bit) and 4 GB (64-bit)
* 250MB of available hard disk space. Internet access

* Free ZoneAlarm Firewall is not available for Vista 64-bit
Microsoft&#174; Windows&#174; XP SP2, SP3, Home or Professional Edition:

* 1 GHz 32-bit processor or higher
* Recommended system RAM: 768 MB
* 250MB of available hard disk space

ZoneAlarm security software works with most types of TCP/IP connections including Ethernet LAN, wireless LAN, DSL, cable modem, and dial-up connections.

* Supported Protocols for Email Protection
* Support for Parental Controls
* Operating Systems Support
* FAQ for ZoneAlarm End-of-Life Policy


So yeah, if you somehow find a "solution" to it, it might work.

[Buffalobiian]

Okay, i guess people here are more than comfortable with their computers (or are hoping to be if you're reading this). We've seen all those fakers try to take advantage of the ignorance of the poor, computer illiterate individuals.

The spam in your inbox about the latest worm out there (haven't seen that for a while now actually), the advertisement banners showing you just how many errors your computer is getting, those pop-ups asking you if you're really sure you don't want to download the latest registry fixer...



But today I got one through the phone.



Lady just calls up and talks to me (with an Indian accent, take that for what you will) about my computer.
At first I thought it was my ISP giving me a cease-and-desist notice for downloading some photoshop tutorial DVDs.

It took a while for me to see where she's getting at. According to her, my computer will crash in 48 hours, and they know this because they detected that my computer has downloaded a virus (via some service called International Routing). Next, they wanted me to go to their website and download a remote-assistance tool that will help show me "with my own eyes" the errors in my computer.

She kept insisting that "she's trying to help me" when I told her it's not an appropriate time for a call right now, and despite all her godly knowledge about how this "virus" ended up on my computer, she couldn't tell what antivirus I was using, or what windows OS I was on. Thinking back now, I should have asked how she worked out my physical address from my IP. :p

Normally I'd scoff at attempts like these and move on, except (by bizarre coincidence?) that my Avast webshield and mailshield were down for both my desktop and laptop and refused to start until I rebooted (other computers around the house were fine.).

So in the meanwhile, I've gotten the lady off my phoneline for now, and am running some scans just for peace of mind.



Anyway. Strange coincidence...

edit: for those interested, the referred site was (www [dot] teche4pc [dot] com). Visiting it doesn't isn't malicious, though I can't say for their tools.

[David75]

You have reached a CIA lab, terminate this phone call or you'll be terminated in the next 48 hours :D

I guess you should have played with her a little, telling her you're under linux and use false program names...

Like:
OpenOffice is the best firewall/ativirus protection there is (do not laugh, one of our ministers here in France thought OpenOffice is a firewall... and she was in charge of internet regulations...)

[Buffalobiian]

You have reached a CIA lab, terminate this phone call or you'll be terminated in the next 48 hours :D

I guess you should have played with her a little, telling her you're under linux and use false program names...

Like:
OpenOffice is the best firewall/ativirus protection there is (do not laugh, one of our ministers here in France thought OpenOffice is a firewall... and she was in charge of internet regulations...)

She was so persistent, I'm sure she'll call back. If I have time, I'll give that a try - and if I'm MIA after 44hrs, you'll know why. ;)