Re: Some of my posts missing

"~BD~" <BoaterDave.is.@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Steve Thackery wrote:

[...]

>> I know what I'm doing when it comes to PC security.

I'll take your word for that.

>> You'll be surprised at how many expert users don't
>> use any security software, although they are usually
>> fairly quiet about it in case they get lambasted by
>> people who think they know better

A good percentage of "security software" is actually just a means of
enforcing good behavior. Many expert users practice good behavior
because they are accustomed to doing things that way, there is no need
to enforce policy on themselves in certain circumstances.

> Ah! I had no idea that you are an "expert user". I'm not!

Neither am I, and I couldn't tell by looking at a program's guts,
whether or not it is infected by a virus. So, I *do* need a file scanner
that can (somewhat) reliably detect infections in programs I obtain
through trusted channels.

[...]

>> Several years ago I realised that I hadn't had a
>> single virus alert for as long as I could remember
>> (yes, truly), except on things like unsolicited email
>> attachments that I wouldn't have opened anyway,
>> and even they had faded to nothing as the ISP's
>> junk filters improved.

More people should be able to exhibit results like this through safe
practices. I recommend having a good virus scanner and *never* giving it
any real malware samples to deal with. I proves that your *first
defense* (yourself) is working well. On the off chance that a virus
comes to you through your trusted channels, you have a means to detect
it prior to attempting to execute it.

Antivirus is *part of* safe computing practices.

>> So I decided to remove the whole lot and see
>> what happens. Answer: no infections/hacks/
>> whatever for five years. I'm being absolutely
>> truthful.

{[ but how would you know? ]}

Not very many viruses are travelling in trusted channels these days, the
low hanging fruit is in "zero day" malicious applications (presented as
trojans). As OSes strive for more "enforcement" of safe practices, the
landscape changes - and the type of malware seen as "prevalent" changes
with it.

>> Every six months I use Kaspersky's online scanner
>> (which has the same detection performance as it's
>> commercial product) and every time my PC has
>> come out clean. Perfectly pristine. (Last time I did it,
>> I couldn't find Kaspersky's online scanner, so I used
>> Symantec's instead).

Modern malware can hide from online scanners, in fact some can hide from
administrative tools. Of course it would have to get on the machine and
execute *before* implementing any stealth. If it can't get in, it can't
hide itself.

>> Be honest, when was the last time your anti-malware
>> software genuinely stopped a proper threat? Let's see
>> the log file entries!

I got a "Kakworm" alert from an e-mail sent by a Microsoft tech support
person. I had previously applied the "Scriptlet.Typelib/Eyedog" patch so
it was not a genuine threat, but Norton 5.0 would not have known I
wasn't vulnerable - so it was a valid alert on real malware.

....exploit based worms add their own twist on the whole idea that you
can control what code enters your machine.

> I'm truly amazed by your stance, Steve. I've been interested in,
> and have studied malware, in depth, over the last 4+ years
> and am quite sure that your Windows machine has a 99.9%
> certainty to have some kind of malware infection by now.

We don't know his computer's configuration, nor his computing habits,
so - we know nothing.

[...]

"Steve Thackery" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "~BD~" <BoaterDave.is.@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>> I really do hope that Steve reads and absorbs what you have said!
>
> Of course - you've been polite and constructive (although without
> addressing the actual question) so of course I've read and absorbed
> what you have said.

I have no idea what the actual question was, I only commented on the
subthread's virus security aspects. Anything else would have been "off
topic" for the group I am in. Strict adherance to good practices will
negate the need for most of the anti this and that security software
that is gobbling up cycles worldwide. If a worm *does* infest your
machine, it could drop malware that online scanners (or even local
scanners and administrative tools) won't find.