Adware Warning !!

[Ken N Tx]

I was online this morning for a couple of hours. I visited about 3 of my normal websites, after which i ran my Anti-Adware scans.

Ad-Aware SE found 5 in my Registry Keys and Registry Values all High Risk!!

Ran my Microsoft Antispyware and it found 6 in my Registry!! They recommended that they be removed immediately!!

This is the first time in months that i have had any kind of Adware in my Registry Keys..There is one site that i always get a low risk Ad in my C:Files.

I do not know where they came from, but i thought i would pass this on to the members of this site....Ken N Tx

[freebird]

I just tried a new spyware program called spy doctor 3.1 listed by pcworld on download.com...free and it found some stuff that spybot didn't.

[Ken N Tx]

I run Spybot also, it only found some when i first downloaded it about 6 months ago..The only reason i keep it is because it was free and who knows, some day it might just save me some trouble..

[drbailey]

Hey Ken ,
I just run MS scan , spybot ,and adware !!! Ms runs all the time , the last two finds spys every time . I dont know whats best , so I just use them all all the time. A computer repair lady told me that spybot and adware ARE spys, Someone on the late TF said she was pluged into the wrong port!!!!! ROF , Thats funny , I just keep my fingers crossed. Thanks Ken

[jodyand]

I ran spy doctor yesterday and it found 16 things none high risk then i ran ad-aware and it found 4 more things still not high risk.

[Durwood]

I was online this morning for a couple of hours. I visited about 3 of my normal websites, after which i ran my Anti-Adware scans.

Ad-Aware SE found 5 in my Registry Keys and Registry Values all High Risk!!

Ran my Microsoft Antispyware and it found 6 in my Registry!! They recommended that they be removed immediately!!

This is the first time in months that i have had any kind of Adware in my Registry Keys..There is one site that i always get a low risk Ad in my C:Files.

I do not know where they came from, but i thought i would pass this on to the members of this site....Ken N Tx

I certainly hope that SJs Valentine girl isn't considered a spy or we are all doomed. :beatdeadh

Durwood

[Rob]

I've been using SpywareBlaster for quite awhile and have had excellent results with it. It keeps that junk off to begin with, so I don't have to run SpyBot or AdAware hardly ever. Just keep SpywareBlaster updated often with the option in the program, and it works great. It's FREE too. You can find it here: http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html

I also use and highly recommend CrapCleaner to clean up temp files, etc. It works great too and is also FREE! Get it at: http://www.ccleaner.com

With CrapCleaner, if you have a few cookies you do not want deleted, such as the one that stores your log-in in for this great tractor site, use the Options menu item in CrapCleaner, then select Cookies and move the ones you wish to save into the area to save them.

Both work great, go get them! :fing32:

Hope there's no typo's here. Broke my wrist last week and one handed typing isn't my cup of tea. :bonk:

- Rob

[jodyand]

:Welcome: Rob thanks for the links and i hope your wrist heals up quick.

[Greg]

Oh man.......! You PC guys get to download all the neat programs....











:aetsch:

G

[MowHoward2210]

ROF ROF ROF

I found nothing, because I ran nothing, because I don't have nothing. :fing32:

[Greg]

Sometimes you feel like the Maytag repairman....right Mow, Muddy?







ho...hum... ROF ROF

[MowHoward2210]

YUP! :rauch10:

[Mark / Ohio]

This seems like the perfect time to post these links for the apple guys.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/mac/0,39020393,39192111,00.htm

http://news.com.com/2100-1002_3-5629084.html

Your time is a comin'

[MowHoward2210]

Funny! Number one link is from a software company that wants to scare people into buying their product. And the number two link just notes that they released some patches before the phishing problem became a big issue.

No OS will ever be 100% secure, but it's nice when an OS maker finds exploits and fixes exploits before they become a problem.

I agree there will be some nasties in time, but I doubt it it will ever be on the scale that you see with Windows. Wouldn't you think with the intense hatred of Apple, and hatred of the iPods success, that by now some hacker would want the first sucessful virus for OSX on his trophy mantle?

[Mark / Ohio]

I'll post another couple of links for you entertainment that are sort of a follow up to the Norton blurb. :00000060:

http://www.dvforge.com/virus.shtml

http://www.geeknewscentral.com/archives/003999.html

BTW, I found all these posted in the GRC.com security forum. There also is some links with stories questioning Mozilla and Firefox starting to show up more often. Most as you say by security companies. Never the less, best never to get too comfortable. Hackers love dares and challenges.

You Mac guys are a hard bunch to scare. ROF

[MowHoward2210]

With my luck, I would have been victim in the 25K contest! :Pcwiz:

[ducati996]

Some of your guys are living under a false sense of security -
Ducati

================================================== =======
Mozilla Patches Firefox Hole

Wed Mar 23, 4:00 PM ET Technology - PC World


Paul Roberts, IDG News Service

The Mozilla Foundation issued a patch this week for a previously undisclosed hole in its popular Firefox Web browser and is encouraging Firefox users to download the software update as soon as possible.


• Symantec: Hackers Turn Attention to Mozilla Browsers
• Mozilla Ditches Browser Suite
• Are Fewer People Switching to Firefox?
• Mozilla Warns of Firefox Security Holes
• Poll: Safari's Popularity Scorched By Firefox



The nonprofit organization released Firefox 1.0.2 (available as a free download) to fix a buffer overflow vulnerability in a Firefox feature for processing GIF image files. The patch is the second security patch issued in less than a month, but the foundation reassured users that the browser's open source platform is secure, and says it does not know of any active exploits for the hole.


The GIF processing hole was discovered by Internet Security Systems (ISS) and makes Firefox users who are running earlier versions of the browser vulnerable to buffer overflow attack, according to a statement released by the Mozilla Foundation.


ISS discovered the hole in a review of the Firefox source code, which is available on the Internet.


In a statement attributed to Chris Hofmann, the foundation's director of engineering, the discovery of the hole and release of a patch shortly after are evidence that the open source software model is safer and more secure than closed-source commercial code, because it is "scoured by thousands" of contributors, developers and professionals, and "not just the company's development team."

Cause for Concern?

In February, the Mozilla Foundation released Firefox 1.0.1 to fix 17 security vulnerabilities in Firefox, including changes to guard against spoofing of Web addresses and the security indicator on Web sites. However, the foundation is not planning to adopt a regular patch release cycle, which Microsoft uses, and will continue to issue updates as they are needed, Hofmann says in a statement.


Firefox has been gaining in popularity since the first full version of the browser was released in November. More than 27 million copies of Firefox have been downloaded since then, pushing Microsoft's Internet Explorer (IE) share of the browser market below 90 percent for the first time in years.


Firefox installations were 5.7 percent of the U.S. browser market as of February 18. IE controlled 89.9 percent, according to statistics released by Web tracking company WebSideStory.


However, Hofmann denies that Firefox is becoming a more attractive candidate for hackers as it gains market share.


"There is this idea that market share alone will make you have more vulnerabilities. It is not relational at all. Not being in the operating system and not supporting Microsoft's proprietary Active X are phenomenal advantages to us," he says in a statement.

================================================== =====

Are Hackers Now Gunning for the Mac?

Macs still have fewer bugs than Windows PCs, but Apple moves to plug security holes before problems crop up.

================================================== ======


Rebecca Freed, PC World
Friday, October 15, 2004
In early October Apple released a small series of patches for Mac OS X version 10.2 and later. Most of the fixes in this group blocked possible denial-of-service problems that are, to date, theoretical. For example, one addresses vulnerability in a Unix printing system that might expose passwords to hackers, in uncommon situations.

In the Windows world, no sooner is an OS hole publicized than someone writes a hack to exploit it. Since the last Mac OS X security update was the third in a month, and because some of the holes looked ripe for exploiting, I have to wonder whether the Mac is now attracting more unwanted attention from hackers.

According to Tim Bajarin, principal analyst with research firm Creative Strategies and a longtime Apple watcher, "The vulnerabilities unfortunately are inherent in the Unix world, and Apple's choice to build OS X on a Unix foundation brings with it this risk. Apple's move is more proactive: They are constantly testing the OS to catch any potential security holes before they become an issue. In that sense, they have gone to school on Microsoft's problems in this space and are making sure they leave no stone unturned in their quest to keep the OS as secure as possible."

"At the same time," Bajarin continues, "the media attention about Apple's OS being secure has clearly tweaked the interest of hackers, but as of now we have not seen any serious effort by the hacking community to deliberately expose any holes or attack the OS."

John Gruber, author of the Weblog Daring Fireball and another savvy Mac observer, thinks the recent spate of updates is just a small, short-term uptick, and doesn't indicate that the Mac is losing the high ground in the war against viruses, worms, and Trojan horses. On the Mac's reputation for being more secure than Windows, he says, "It's important to note that Macs tend not to get attacked, not that they can't be attacked. The vast majority of the fixes in Mac OS X security updates are in response to potential exploits, not actual exploits."

"And many of the fixes in typical Mac OS X security updates aren't Mac-specific," Gruber says, "but rather are updates to open-source components and tools. Apple has been diligent with regard to keeping Mac OS X's Unix layer up-to-date."

My take? This just means that Mac users have to keep their OS patched--like Windows users--but there's no cause for alarm. Apple has an automatic update service, just as Microsoft does for Windows. Using this service is the best way to keep your Apple software current.

The Unix-based nature of Mac OS X remains much more of a strength than a liability. Although it allows greater exposure, it also makes it likely that programmers can and will respond with fixes quickly.

Regardless of whether this tarnishes Apple's halo, the bottom line remains that attacks on the Mac have been vastly fewer than those on Windows. Most typical Mac users still have little to fear from the miscreants we Windows users have to vigilantly guard against.

[Mower_Man42]

:1106: Spyware is something we all have got to get use to, it`s sad to say. But run as many program as you can Spy Bot is a good tool and spyware blaster goes right along with it. When you open Spy Bot to run the program you`ll see the word IMMUNIZE. Just click on it, the widow will change at the bottom of that page you`ll see a notice about javacools Spyware Blaster after installed [it is a free program] just click on it and it will block all known threats, they have a list and it keeps growing everyday. This is the link if anyone wants to add it to Spy Bot.... http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html

[MowHoward2210]

One of my points is that OSX is pretty good about being patched or fixed before there is a widespread problem. I have an anti-virus program that I got free from being a dot-Mac member. I have a new machine about 3 weeks old, and I haven't given much thought about installing the AV on it. Not a big concern to me at this time.


I just keep my system updates current and don't click on anything stupid. I think that is good advice for everybody.

[Greg]

"Some of your guys are living under a false sense of security -"

Not exactly...Some of us, because of our current choice of Brower (Firefox) or OS (Mac OS X), just have fewer minute by minute "bug" worries. It doesn't mean we are blind or do nothing about infestations on our computer. We ARE doing things..... like NOT using IE whenever possible... ROF ROF ROF ROF

Greg

[ducati996]

"Some of your guys are living under a false sense of security -"

Not exactly...Some of us, because of our current choice of Brower (Firefox) or OS (Mac OS X), just have fewer minute by minute "bug" worries. It doesn't mean we are blind or do nothing about infestations on our computer. We ARE doing things..... like NOT using IE whenever possible... ROF ROF ROF ROF

Greg


The problem is with open source software - its great because its open source but who is watching the store? How open is open? You have MS bug's announced way in advance because of the resources dedicated to finding them. Those who get affected are the ones not taking the precautions. With open sources its so open, you dont know where to start....

Ducati

[Rodster]

I tried Spybot but did not know what was safe to get rid of. Do they have a no brainer that is good for low tech guys like me?
Rodster

[Durwood]

I tried Spybot but did not know what was safe to get rid of. Do they have a no brainer that is good for low tech guys like me? Rodster

As far as i am concerned the new one by microsoft is hands down the best on the market. It even recommends what to do with what it picks up and it's free. And i bet i have six or seven of these programs.

Durwood

[ducati996]

I did post Adware Pro 1.05 in this forum somewhere....Some of the other brands get too aggressive and mess with registry entries (not good)..
I have never had an issue with lavasoft products (Adware)

Ducati :beatdeadh

[jodyand]

Here is the link to that thread Duc.
http://www.mytractorforum.com/showthread.php?t=500

[Greg]

"With open sources its so open, you dont know where to start...."

But Duc....MS IE, Outlook are so full of holes they are the epitomy of what you call "Open Source".....
ROF ROF ROF ROF ROF ROF

[ducati996]

"With open sources its so open, you dont know where to start...."

But Duc....MS IE, Outlook are so full of holes they are the epitomy of what you call "Open Source".....
ROF ROF ROF ROF ROF ROF

================================================== ======

Sure Greg,

Its all how you define your swiss cheese - and how you like to wear your blinders.... :bump9: :bump9:

Ducati
================================================== ======
New Firefox Version Heightens Debate Over Browser Security

Thu Mar 24, 3:21 PM ET Technology - TechWeb

The Mozilla Foundation on Wednesday pushed out a new version of Firefox to patch three vulnerabilities, just days after a major security firm said the open-source browser had 60 percent more vulnerabilities in the last half of 2004 than Microsoft's Internet Explorer.

The group released Firefox 1.0.2 on its site to fix three flaws, including one inherited from Netscape in processing .gif image files. That bug was discovered by Internet Security Systems (ISS), and if hackers were able to get users to visit sites or view e-mail messages with specially-crafted .gif files, they could take control of their PCs.

A patch was produced before ISS alerted the public, said Chris Hofmann, chief of engineering at Mozilla, so no harm, no foul. "The bug patched in this update has no known real world exploits, and we were able to provide a quick response."

This is the second security-related update of Firefox in the last month. In late February, the non-profit foundation released v. 1.0.1, which patched 17 vulnerabilities.

The spate of vulnerabilities and the updates bring into question the assumption by many that Firefox is more secure than Microsoft's Internet Explorer, one of the reasons many experts and analysts have given for Firefox's rapid climb from 0 to about 6 percent of the usage share in the United States.

To add fuel to that argument, Symantec this week said in its Internet Security Threat Report that during the last six months of 2004, it counted 21 vulnerabilities for Firefox, but only 13 for IE.

Although IE's count was dramatically up over the first half's mere 3, it was down from the 17 found in the last six months of 2003.

"This is likely due to two factors: the effort that Microsoft has undertaken to secure Internet Explorer and patch latent vulnerabilities, and the shift of vulnerability researcher interest towards alternative browsers that are being marketed or promoted as secure," Symantec's researchers concluded.


The surge in Firefox vulnerabilities, said Symantec, was directly tied to "the increased popularity and deployment of the browser, which is itself a reaction to the widespread abuse of several high-profile vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer."


Mozilla's Hofmann countered. "Rather than get hung up on the specific numbers, it's better to look at the trends. The bottom line in just about all the independent studies I've seen is that the severity of exploits discovered in IE is greater, and Microsoft takes longer to fix the problems."


Symantec's numbers backed up Hofmann.


By Symantec's classification, IE still had a higher percentage of "high severity" vulnerabilities in the second half of the year than did Firefox. Nine out of the 13 IE vuls, or 69 percent, were tagged as "high," while 11 of the 21 Firefox vulnerabilities, or 52 percent, were so marked.


And, Symantec said, the Mozilla Foundation fixes flaws much faster than does Microsoft.


"They patch faster, simple as that," said Alfred Huger, vice president of engineering for Symantec's security response team. "The average time between when a vulnerability is publicly announced and when a patch comes out is 43 days for Internet Explorer, only 26 days for Firefox."


"It's amazing the kind of rapid turn-around we see on some bugs when they get reported," said Hofmann in explaining Firefox's advantage. "All the code is available and the [open-source] community can help us to find and fix security problems faster than closed-source commercial software efforts."


And IE still leads Firefox -- leads every Windows application, in fact -- in the total number of vulnerabilities to-date. Symantec's count has IE as having "just north of 300 known vulnerabilities," said Huger. "That's the most vulnerabilities in any [Windows] application that we're aware of. The next in line is IIS [Internet Information Services) with 116."

Mozilla's code line, which goes back as far as Netscape, which preceded IE, has "under 100," said Huger.


Mozilla's Hofmann said that future updates to Firefox -- and its other products, which include the Mozilla suite and the Thunderbird e-mail client -- will be released "on an ongoing basis andas warranted."

"We must stay ahead of the curve in patching potential vulnerabilities," he said.

[MowHoward2210]

Interesting. Still sounds like the Mozilla developers are quicker to patch exploits than MS.

Here's some more news:

High Risk Flaws Found in IE, Outlook (http://anandtech.com/news/shownews.aspx?i=24043)

[Durwood]

Interesting. Still sounds like the Mozilla developers are quicker to patch exploits than MS.

Here's some more news:

High Risk Flaws Found in IE, Outlook (http://anandtech.com/news/shownews.aspx?i=24043)


The real problem with IE over Mozilla is that most hackers don't waste their time with Mozilla because it is not as big as IE. IE is still what you want to go after if you want to mess a lot of people up. I wish us Firefox users would stay kinda hidden and nobody would know about us for that very reason. :00000060:

Durwood

[ducati996]

Its basically its splitting hairs because in reality neither is safer than the other. And what Mozilla, Godzilla, firefox or whatever its called :) they really havent seperated themselves as offering anything new and exiciting, just a couple features... fail to see the WOW factor in it....but the good thing is it has its loyal fan club :) :trink40:

I really hope you guys are taking no offense in my comments overall
but maybe seeing things differently from another perspective.
Overall the reason why Microsoft is number one, is because it is
the best. Love em or hate em they just build a better product.
Maybe if something was offered that was truly unique and defined
themselves as such, there would be more of a variety. Too much
Microsoft influence is present in these so-called alternatives products.

Duc

[MowHoward2210]

No offense taken, I'm used to differing opinions especially when it comes to OS's.

I agree and disagree that MS is the best. It is the number one platform by sheer numbers. It is usually the best choice for large business/office applications, and is the better gaming platform.

Take the above out of the equation, I think Mac OSX is a superior "out-of the-box" experience for a lot of people when you factor in the bundled multimedia capability, and the absence of viruses and spyware. JMO.

[Durwood]

Its basically its splitting hairs because in reality neither is safer than the other. And what Mozilla, Godzilla, firefox or whatever its called :) they really havent seperated themselves as offering anything new and exiciting, just a couple features... fail to see the WOW factor in it....but the good thing is it has its loyal fan club :) :trink40:

I really hope you guys are taking no offense in my comments overall
but maybe seeing things differently from another perspective.
Overall the reason why Microsoft is number one, is because it is
the best. Love em or hate em they just build a better product.
Maybe if something was offered that was truly unique and defined
themselves as such, there would be more of a variety. Too much
Microsoft influence is present in these so-called alternatives products.

Duc


Duc, i have at least 12 browsers on my computer right now and IE is used the least. There are IE based browsers that are much better. Avant and Slimbrowser are really sweet browsers. Firefox, Opera, and Netscape are not based on IE and i use them the most. They don't use the "active x" java that IE uses and that is how most threats come thru your computer from my understanding. Take a wild chance and try some of the other browsers out.
Now there are some websites that only work with IE, and that is where i use the Avant and Slimbrowser the most.

Durwood

[ducati996]

. Firefox, Opera, and Netscape are not based on IE and i use them the most. They don't use the "active x" java that IE uses and that is how most threats come thru your computer from my understanding. Take a wild chance and try some of the other browsers out.
Now there are some websites that only work with IE, and that is where i use the Avant and Slimbrowser the most.

Durwood

What makes you think I'm not familar with some of the others? I still see the heavy influence of IE in them... Active X can be disabled by the way...
Being in the field of product development I had the opportunity to develop two different platforms for network Video servers - one in windows and one in Linux.
Utimately Windows OS won out based on performance and compatibility with hardware (compression and capture boards). The reason for developing two O.S systems was to put to rest which was better for our applications.

Again this dosent mean its the answer for all applications. But it might shed light on a little bit of background and resources available to me personally.

Ducati

[CatDaddy]

Durwood,
Avant & Slimbrowser are nothing but IE 'wrappers' adding skins & some different functions, and, in the case of Slimbrowser, stripping away some of MS's modules. They're still IE at the core.

The current Mozilla (in all it's varieties) is built on the cast-off remains of the original "Nutscrape" browser/Internet provider (My God, that sucked almost as much as AOhelL does today). Converting to an 'open source' format was the only way the product continued to "live" - driven by anti-MS forces. Similar in it's own way to GNU/Linux.

If you think back, Netscape was the only significant competitor to MS back at the dawn of the Browser Wars. And that's why some web sites/pages still only load properly under IE. MS used it's 800 lb. gorilla status to implement certain 'design/coding' structures in HTML/CSS/etc. that favored IE. These "standards" "found" their way into FrontPage (and to some extent DreamWeaver) further pushing the development of alternative browsers further towards the margins.

IIRC, both IE & Mozilla products are based on the now antiquated MOSAIC platform. Again, IIRC, it was designed to be one of the first (if not the first) cross-platform internet browser.

-=A=-

[Durwood]

Durwood,
Avant & Slimbrowser are nothing but IE 'wrappers' adding skins & some different functions, and, in the case of Slimbrowser, stripping away some of MS's modules. They're still IE at the core.
-=A=-


I acknowedged that Catdaddy. I said they were IE based browsers. Yet, they have enough stuff added to them that i enjoy using them much more than IE.
I guess until a person uses them , it's hard to explain.

Durwood