Re: ZoneAlarm ver 5.0.590.015

Discussion in 'Virus Information' started by Interrogative, Jul 8, 2004.

  1. With all the comments I still recommend you download the patch to ".043".
     
    Bullwinkel J. Moose, Jul 9, 2004
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Interrogative

    Shane Guest

    Bugger! I've been sussed!


    Shane


     
    Shane, Jul 9, 2004
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3.  
    Richard A. Landkamer, Jul 10, 2004
    #23
  4. Sorry can you translate for us who live in the colonies. ((;)
     
    Bullwinkel J. Moose, Jul 10, 2004
    #24
  5. About a week ago, I checked to see if there was a new release of ZoneAlarm Pro
    v5. There was then available v50.590.043, which is newer than the previous
    v50.590.015. However, I also noticed that the version being offered kept switching
    back and forth between the new v50.590.043 and the previous v50.590.015.

    I was able to download and test ZoneAlarm Pro v50.590.043. It was not much
    better than the previous v50,590.015. v50.590.043 locked up my computer when I
    attempted to go out on the Internet in the same odd manner that v50.590.015 did, i.e.,
    my computer did not freeze, but it would not accept any commands. I had to cut off
    the power to shut down my computer. I subsequently found the following strange
    message from ZoneAlarm Pro "TrueVector Service" 3 times in the Windows XP Pro
    Application Event Viewer:

    "Event Type: Error
    Event Source: TrueVector Service
    Event Category: None
    Event ID: 5003
    Date: 7/3/2004
    Time: 1:00:35 AM
    User: N/A
    Computer: MYCOMPUTER
    Description:
    TrueVector driver: Driver install or load failure: MarkNTDeviceDriver. Win32 error:
    Access is denied."

    I have no idea what MarkNTDeviceDriver is. I got no hits when I tried searching
    for anything with this name as having ever been installed on my computer.

    ZoneAlarm Pro v5 tries to interface with the virus scanners of other vendors. I am
    running McAfee VirusScan v8.0, which is a stand alone virus scanner. Unlike some
    versions of McAfee VirusScan, it does not come bundled with an optional firewall
    of its own. I tried turning off the interface with McAfee VirusScan in ZoneAlarm
    Pro v50.590.043, but I still got the same bad results.

    Bottom line: I had to uninstall ZoneAlarm Pro v50.590.043, and reinstall my old
    ZoneAlarm Pro v4.5.594.000, and then reload all of my previous settings. All this
    appeared to work OK, but I still hung trying to get out on the Internet. So I then
    used the Windows XP System Restore function to get back to the System Restore
    checkpoint that I took immediately before I embarked on my venture to install and
    test the "new" ZoneAlarm Pro v50.590.043. I again restored my previous settings
    for ZoneAlarm Pro v4.5.594 that I also backed up before embarking on this venture.
    Finally, I was back to normal after wasting about 2 hours on this ZoneAlarm Pro v5
    beta testing venture.

    ZoneAlarm Pro used to be a reliable stable product. But the first two v50 releases
    have been failed beta test versions as far as I am concerned. What really irks me
    is that this is not being marketed as a best test version. Apparently, it works for
    some prople but not others.

    Richard A. Landkamer
     
    Richard A. Landkamer, Jul 10, 2004
    #25
  6. Interrogative

    Don MI Guest

    Addition.

    Errors can be classified is several ways such as Critical, Major or Minor.
    Most utilities such as chkdsk or Norton Disk Doctor will find the Critical
    and Major errors. A utilities ability to find minor errors is a function of
    the program criteria and the programmer.
    I would expect a program like Norton Disk Doctor to find more minor errors
    than a Windows utility like chkdsk. Minor errors are those that do not
    effect system performance.

    Don
     
    Don MI, Jul 10, 2004
    #26
  7. Interrogative

    Shane Guest

    A thousand pardons (or a kiloapology, ie 1024 apologies).

    Dash it all! I've been caught red-handed!



    Shane
     
    Shane, Jul 10, 2004
    #27
  8. Interrogative

    Shane Guest

    About a week ago I was updating an ex-pat's machine in France. I first
    looked at her machine last year - shortly before Blaster - when she had no
    firewall, no AV, no SP1 patches. Her French Wanadoo software doesn't allow
    ICF. I installed ZA then for the simple interface. After removing a number
    of viruses offline (so much for NTFS).

    So this year I took a cd of updates with me - including ZA 50.590.015. I
    installed 15 SP2 patches and updated ZA - which promptly informed me an
    update was available - 50.590.043 - so I installed that too. Then she
    couldn't send e-mails so I restored to before 50.590.015. Then I checked for
    updates again and it offered 50.590.015. Installed that and checked again
    and got the *your security is up-to-date* message. Checked the installed
    version - definately 50.590.015.

    The e-mail problem was solved by removing all from the ZA *Programs* list.

    Since coming back she's e-mailed me asking if she should install the update
    it's offering her - 50.590.043.

    Shane
     
    Shane, Jul 10, 2004
    #28
  9. I suggest you go onto their website and report what you have found. They run
    an active newsgroup with company supervision. They should be told of your
    situation and problems with their new version.
     
    Bullwinkel J. Moose, Jul 10, 2004
    #29
  10. Your apology accepted (to make you happy.) I still don't know what "sussed"
    means.
     
    Bullwinkel J. Moose, Jul 10, 2004
    #30
  11. Interrogative

    Joan Archer Guest

    <lol> It means found out, it was directed at me. <g>
    Joan
     
    Joan Archer, Jul 10, 2004
    #31
  12. Interrogative

    Shane Guest

    Gor blimey, Guvnor, I've been rumbled!


    Shane


     
    Shane, Jul 10, 2004
    #32
  13. Interrogative

    Joan Archer Guest

    You were rumbled long ago <lol>
    Joan
     
    Joan Archer, Jul 10, 2004
    #33
  14. Interrogative

    Shane Guest

    Joanie, baby!

    ;-)


    Shane


     
    Shane, Jul 10, 2004
    #34
  15. Interrogative

    Shane Guest

    We cheerful Cockneys are slow but steady.

    Strike a light! Where'd I leave me spoons???


    Shane
     
    Shane, Jul 10, 2004
    #35
  16. Interrogative

    Harold Guest

    Well you without problems are lucky. I have had many problems with it and
    was advised by ZA's tech support to go back to version 4. It caused
    problems with Norton's email protection, an HP printer driver, chkdsk, and
    who knows what else.

    I know on 3 of my machines, all running either XPP or XP Home I had
    identical problems. So those who have experienced no problems are lucky.
    Sorry if these things have been said before but I can't seem to find the
    start of this thread to follow it sequentially. So if it hadn't been said I
    wanted to make sure others were aware of these downfalls with version 5.
     
    Harold, Jul 10, 2004
    #36
  17. Nope. It most certainly does NOT work as it should. Still interfering badly
    with some server progs.
     
    Interrogative, Jul 11, 2004
    #37
  18. Neither. Both V5.x progs have problems that are unresolved as yet.
     
    Interrogative, Jul 11, 2004
    #38
  19. problem

    No, it doesnt. Some progs that act as servers certainly cannot work with it.
    They do the old lockup thing that the first V5.x update caused.
    No, dont do that. Bad idea at the moment.
     
    Interrogative, Jul 11, 2004
    #39
  20. Run any progs that act as servers? I do and it wont get on with them.
     
    Interrogative, Jul 11, 2004
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.