Printable View
Tell you whats wrong?its all through the thread mate...most people posted that it missed 6Quote:
Originally posted by ultimatejester@13 January 2004 - 05:26
Anybody wanna tell me what's wrong with norton. It caught 600 on mine. Everyfile is infected except readme.txt
Nice post mate :)Quote:
Originally posted by excalis@13 January 2004 - 05:32
Top Firewall Challenge
http://download.com.com/1200-2027-937928.html?tag=sptlt
I forgot the link for best anti-virus challege sorry, I know it's somewhere on cnet. All I know is that Norton won.
http://www.cnet.com
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi/Darkr...an_results.jpg
My results fared as well as the majority. Extremely disappointing for NAV2004Pro. Now that we have all been "manly men" and taken this little challenge, how about sharing the gruesome details as to which trojans and/or viruses these AV applications seem to be clueless at detecting? <_<
Personally, I think the best defense for all of us and our respected AV programs would be just to avoid the damnable things altogether. And I would appreciate knowing what exactly to avoid if I can possibly help it. ;)
Ahh, the beauty of Norton "Corporate". Much more lightweight and effective then thoose bloated resource hogging versions of Norton pro etc.B)
http://nowarrant.gotdns.com/noviruscangetme.JPG
Im sceptical on that wizz...lol..cause i tried that in my research..ill just dig up my resultsQuote:
Originally posted by DVD PIRATE III+10 January 2004 - 19:35--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (DVD PIRATE III @ 10 January 2004 - 19:35)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Wizzandabe@11 January 2004 - 14:28
Passed with flying colours, no update needed, nothing.
Norton Corp 8.1.1.314 :D
But the only one that I found that realised all of them for what they were was....
PC-Cillin
Just because Nortons didnt recognise them as a threat doesnt mean theyre not..you try double clicking on one of the ones that it didnt see as a threat and see what happens..
I didnt think so...lol[/b][/quote]
Actually I tried clicking on quite a few and some of them are not what I would consider viruses.
I only clicked on the ones that I was familiar with and knew would not do any harm.
But you dont want your av being paranoid and calling things viruses that in effect really are not. :01:
Btw, dont try that at home. A lot of thoose babies are pretty dangerous.
Its pretty much the ones ya dont know about that cause havoc..cause if ya antivirus doesnt know/detect them then..thats a fair indication that the(Antivirus Program/AntiTrojan Program) is in need of updating there definitions.
Ive run all of them on a old computer I hooked up at home..lots of re-installs via Norton Ghost :lol:
I'm going to test out Triple S
http://www.bbfree.com/javs/uploads/p...1074025281.gif
Notice the word triple is spelled wrong. Please don't worry about it.
Did anyone out there try changing the options in Norton from the default level of protection to highest level of Bloodhound Heuteristics? It catches way more viruses that way. Mine deleted all the quarantined files in Pc-cillin, Pc-cillin doesn't do a very good job of quarantining viruses. Also enable quarantine if unsuccessful option in Norton, that way threats are more likely to be eliminated.
just used the free version of avg and it found 562 viruses edit : nod32 told me that the archives were damaged so that it could not check the viruses
Al the virus in there don't have much information on the web they're unknown viruses, the one that didn't make it big ;)