Antivirus

[Bart Silverstrim]

Michael "TheZorch" Haney wrote:
> Bart Silverstrim wrote:
>> I can set my AV to update every half hour. Doesn't mean the signatures 
>> are all that up-to-date, though. But if it gives you the warm fuzzies...
>>   
> I've been burned by a lot of other AV programs, either they stop giving 
> away free virus definition updates and make you pay for them, or they 
> don't update often enough and you get caught off guard by some new 
> infection, or etc. etc.   I've recommended Avast to a lot of people who 
> use Windows and they've all been very happy with it.  I configured it 
> for a person who is completely blind and has to rely on JAWS 
> (proprietary text to speech software) to use their computer.  To have it 
> automatically take care of tests like doing scheduled scans, virus 
> definition updates and application updates really simplified things for 
> that person.

I'm not saying it's bad that it does this. I'm just saying, "Don't let 
the frequent updates lull you into a false sense of security."

It's great you've not had trouble and had good experiences with Avast. 
But if you think about it, if you rely on it to find malware, and 
there's malware on the computer that it doesn't find, how would you know 
there isn't something bad on it?

And while Avast may be good in the sea of options, it still may not have 
a perfect record.

No attack meant...I'm trying to point something out to you and other 
readers.

> Ubuntu asks for your password for some takes and to unlock certain 
> configuration screen, but my Gods it doesn't bug you nearly half as much 
> as UAC on Vista.  I only ever see it when I'm start up Synaptic or 
> mounting my second hard drive.

It (Ubuntu) is asking for the password when it would normally take Sudo 
privileges (root privs) to alter something. I wouldn't be surprised if 
it were using sudo behind the scenes half the time.

It makes sense once you're familiar with how Linux works (well, Ubuntu) 
and how it relies on Sudo.

>> It's still there, though.
>>   
> Any AV program has some impact on system resources.  Its just knowing 
> which ones have the least impact.

Yes, I agreed with that. I still don't like it.

>> I'm not a gamer user, I'm not a performance nut, but I do find it 
>> irritating in principal (principle? Too lazy to look it up at the 
>> moment) to be coerced into running something that impacts my system's 
>> memory and CPU usage just because the OS is crap.
>>   
> I am a Gamer but I'm not really a Performance Nut though.  I do like my 
> games to run well and most of my games are older ones.  The latest won't 
> run on this desktop and the laptop I have which was a gift can BARELY 
> run Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion.  If I want to play something like Crysis 
> I'd have to sell my soul for a computer powerful enough to get 30 fps at 
> 800x600 resolution.  

Oh, you know what I mean by gamers. I'm referring to the gamers that lay 
out the dough for the game systems that you fry bacon on unless they're 
liquid-cooled.

>> That said I still run an AV on my one Windows system that is used solely 
>> for supporting my iPod via iTunes.
>>   
> Apple so needs to port iTunes to Linux.  I have a 2GB Sandisk Sansa Clip 
> and Aramark is all I need.  I use iTunes on the Windows side for playing 
> music when I need to be in Windows for some awful reason.

If I had something other than an iPod, I'd probably use Banshee. Not 
caring how much flak I'll get here, I like how the iPod integrates with 
the Mac, and since I don't have a personal Mac, I use an old Windows 
computer to run iTunes.

>> The whole AV reactive model is a POS. :-)
>>   
> True, but until some new technology is developed to combat royal jerks 
> who like to write malicious software (Script Kiddies, not Hackers, get 
> it right) we're stuck with this crapfest.

Technically, it's Windows and the architecture behind it. It's not 
designed for failure, so failing in one area causes it all to topple 
over like a deck of cards.

I would need to review it, but I think
http://duartes.org/gustavo/blog/post/Richard-Feynman-Challenger-Disaster-Software-Engineering
was one of the reference links I used to illustrate the point.

<support>

> I feel your pain, I worked in IT Support for over 10+ years.  I began as 
> a tech answering support calls for HP Pavilion PCs running Windows 3.1 
> and DOS!!!  

Ouch. Pavilions.

Ironically, it's a refit pavilion saved from the scrapheap I'm using for 
  iTunes.

>> Yeah, there's an anti-malware tool from grisoft too.
>>   
> I stopped using AVG a long time ago so I never saw that feature in it.  
> It was inevitable that they'd add it though since everyone else and 
> their brother's second cousin is doing it too.

It's a second free tool from their site.

>> I'm not speaking from recently googles myself but I'm sure there are 
>> examples of "tests" from different sites that would rank Avast in 
>> differently depending on the competition, time of year, test 
>> environment, phase of the moon, etc. regarding effectiveness.
>>   
> In other words "you're mileage my vary" is what you're trying to say 
> here.  :)

Yeah, but that caveat goes for just about everything.

>> I still stand by my point that the entire AV/Anti-spyware/Anti-malware 
>> industry is profiting from the broken architecture of Windows.
> I totally 100% agree with you there.  I've never seen an OS with so many 
> security vulnerability in my life and I've seen a lot of OSes (Unix, Sun 
> Solaris, Linux, BSD, FreeBSD, Mac OS X, BeOS, NextStep, OS/2 Warp, all 
> of the iterations of DOS, Netware, MVS and C/PM).  A multi-billion 
> dollar industry sprang up literally overnight to fix a problem which 
> Microsoft should have fixed a long time ago.  

It's an architecture problem. A product evolution problem. And a 
marketing problem.

If backwards compatibility wasn't (ironically) a priority with MS, a lot 
of the security concerns would have been partially stamped out.

>The ONLY reason I keep XP and Vista around is because many of my 
> games don't work in Wine (Final Fantasy XI is one of them which I play 
> often).

Yes, but this (WINE) could also act as a vehicle to execute Windows 
trojans/worms/etc. on Linux...