Is MBAM is a 100% safe application?
in [Viruses]
|
From: Jenn on 3 May 2010 19:25 "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message news:hrks1d0a7j(a)news5.newsguy.com... > From: "~BD~" <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> > > > | I genuinely felt (still feel) that the picture I posted was in no way > | pornographic and *was* meant simply in fun - *not* intended to be > | offensive. > > > > http://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?act=boardrules > > Terms of Use: > > "You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, > threatening, > sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable > laws. In addition > you will not engage in any sort of spamming, whether it is comment spam > (injecting a > comment into a thread for the purpose of placing a link back to a website > offering the > same services offered here; or services totally unrelated to this > website), the use of > signature links deemed to be for the sole purpose of increasing web > traffic to a site of > interest by the member, or any combination of those two examples. This > includes the > Personal Message feature." > > so whats your point? The image is not any of that. -- Jenn (from Oklahoma)
From: Dustin Cook on 4 May 2010 02:22 "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in news:hrfemu0i3o(a)news2.newsguy.com: > From: "~BD~" <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> > > >| So now we are in a situation where someone (drdos) has posted >| information on a well known technical forum saying one thing ....... >| and Mr David H Lipman (whoever he may *really* be!) making a post on >| Usenet groups claiming that the original poster is wrong. > >| Take a step outside the box, David. > >| How could anyone simply 'visiting' these groups have any notion of >| who is actually telling the truth? > >| I am /inclined/ to believe what *you* say - but there is no >| supporting evidence to that effect - is there? > >| Is it reasonable for readers to accept that, as you have made no >| disparaging comment to the contrary, that "Most wiping, erasing, >| formatting, and partitioning tools will not overwrite logical bad >| sectors on the Disk, leaving the Rootkits and their accompanying >| payload of malware behind and still active."? > >| If so, what action would one recommend one takes before reinstalling >| an operating system on a previously used disk - Darik's Boot and >| Nuke? >| http://download.cnet.com/Darik-s-Boot-and-Nuke-for-CD-and-DVD/3000-209 >| 4_4-10151762.html > >| Or, maybe FDISK will do? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/255867 > >| Or does one simply assume that one's disk is Rootkit free and simply >| use a Windows set-up disk and the in-built formatting facility? > >| -- >| Dave > > Show us *any* malware in the wild that; infects or resides within > the; BIOS, Motherboard or Video-card. And evidently, has some sort of universal translator for the code differences found between them all. :) > **And I do not mean some engineer in lab environment who found he > could introduce malware into the BIOS, Motherboard or Video-card. I would prefer it further if said engineer was able to demostrate operational code instead of a storage site for potentially malicious code which will never get run control; and thus, remain quite... harmless. > There is not taking a step outside the box. This is the reality. > There is NO malware that infects or resides within the; BIOS, > Motherboard or Video-card. Only few malware samples which would make an effort to corrupt the BIOS; and it required very specific hardware in order to do it's deed. One size doesn't fit all. -- "Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...er...roll this...hrrngh.. nudge this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior
From: Dustin Cook on 4 May 2010 02:31 "Jenn" <nope(a)noway.atnohow.anyday> wrote in news:hrnl78$i8k$1(a)news.eternal-september.org: > "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:Xns9D6CA90C9596CHHI2948AJD832(a)69.16.185.247... >> ~BD~ <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> wrote in news:uf6dnfDt- >> LfgU0DWnZ2dnUVZ8tidnZ2d(a)bt.com: >> >>> Dustin Cook wrote: >>>> ~BD~<BoaterDave(a)hotmail.co.ukk> wrote in >>>> news:etmdnSAlabunKkTWnZ2dnUVZ8qednZ2d(a)bt.com: >>>> >>>>> OK - I'm convinced at last. :) >>>>> >>>>> Mbam *is* a 100% safe application! >>>>> ********************************** >>>>> >>>>> See post number 3 - here:- >>>>> >>>>> http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showtopic=141724&hl=Malwarebyt >>>>> es >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yay! Thank God... :) >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I wrote to Malwarebytes and apologised, btw. >>> >>> Whilst I can (and have) registered again under another name, I'd >>> prefer to have my ban rescinded and revert to being BD. >>> >>> How would you feel about putting in a good word for me, Dustin? > > >> Are you smoking crack or heavily drinking? You just told me you >> forged yourself a new identity to evade the BAN previously placed on >> you, and then you want me to put in a good word for you? Laughable, >> frakking laughable. You lack honor and disipline. >> > > I'm thinking you're exaggerating quite alot, Dustin. Anyone can > register under any name on any group. Dave just told you he > re-registered. He didn't have to tell you or anyone and could be a > member in good standing under any other username and no one would > know... but he TOLD you. Yes, Jenn. Anyone can re-register under any name in any group. When one chooses to do so, knowing full well he is banned (which is why he's creating another account in the first place) does *not* in any way show good intentions, nor respect of any sort towards the forum admins. If anything, it further justifies the initial ban that was set on his account. Further, He wouldn't have to tell me or anyone else he did this. As the forum admins do audit for security purposes on occasion; his new userid along with IP would be flagged as belonging to a now banned userID. Ie: he would be caught eventually. Clearly you know little about the options available to someone, should they wish to use them. -- "Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...er...roll this...hrrngh.. nudge this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior
From: Dustin Cook on 4 May 2010 02:48 "Jenn" <nope(a)noway.atnohow.anyday> wrote in news:hrnl78$i8k$1(a)news.eternal-september.org: > "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:Xns9D6CA90C9596CHHI2948AJD832(a)69.16.185.247... >> ~BD~ <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> wrote in news:uf6dnfDt- >> LfgU0DWnZ2dnUVZ8tidnZ2d(a)bt.com: >> >>> Dustin Cook wrote: >>>> ~BD~<BoaterDave(a)hotmail.co.ukk> wrote in >>>> news:etmdnSAlabunKkTWnZ2dnUVZ8qednZ2d(a)bt.com: >>>> >>>>> OK - I'm convinced at last. :) >>>>> >>>>> Mbam *is* a 100% safe application! >>>>> ********************************** >>>>> >>>>> See post number 3 - here:- >>>>> >>>>> http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showtopic=141724&hl=Malwarebyt >>>>> es >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yay! Thank God... :) >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I wrote to Malwarebytes and apologised, btw. >>> >>> Whilst I can (and have) registered again under another name, I'd >>> prefer to have my ban rescinded and revert to being BD. >>> >>> How would you feel about putting in a good word for me, Dustin? > > >> Are you smoking crack or heavily drinking? You just told me you >> forged yourself a new identity to evade the BAN previously placed on >> you, and then you want me to put in a good word for you? Laughable, >> frakking laughable. You lack honor and disipline. >> > > I'm thinking you're exaggerating quite alot, Dustin. Anyone can > register under any name on any group. Dave just told you he > re-registered. He didn't have to tell you or anyone and could be a > member in good standing under any other username and no one would > know... but he TOLD you. I disagree, Jenn. Anyone can register with any name the person desires, so long as the follow the forum rules. Having an ID banned and creating anotherone does not follow the rules; and it can result in tresspass complaints to his service provider. The fact he was banned negated his privledges on that site. Accessing that site or any other is a privledge, not a right and the site admins do have options. Secondly, He didn't have to tell me anything about creating a new user account. The site is routely checked to ensure security is being maintained. His new account would have been flagged using any number of criteria. I'm not going to get into specifics of how it works, but to assume he or anyone else can create a new ID after losing another one; is foolish and somewhat arrogant. Not to mention, highly incorrect. You do not have anonymity on the internet, you have a false sense of it instead. The fact he had to register under another name because the admins didn't want him having an account there is actually a form of digital criminal tresspass. -- "Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...er...roll this...hrrngh.. nudge this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior
From: Dustin Cook on 4 May 2010 02:53
"Jenn" <nope(a)noway.atnohow.anyday> wrote in news:hrnm1m$l3s$2(a)news.eternal-september.org: > "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message > news:hrks1d0a7j(a)news5.newsguy.com... >> From: "~BD~" <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> >> >> >> | I genuinely felt (still feel) that the picture I posted was in no >> | way pornographic and *was* meant simply in fun - *not* intended to >> | be offensive. >> >> >> >> http://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?act=boardrules >> >> Terms of Use: >> >> "You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, >> hateful, threatening, >> sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any >> applicable laws. In addition >> you will not engage in any sort of spamming, whether it is comment >> spam (injecting a >> comment into a thread for the purpose of placing a link back to a >> website offering the >> same services offered here; or services totally unrelated to this >> website), the use of >> signature links deemed to be for the sole purpose of increasing web >> traffic to a site of >> interest by the member, or any combination of those two examples. >> This includes the >> Personal Message feature." >> >> > > > so whats your point? The image is not any of that. The image is a front nudie view of a woman. This could fall under obsene and sexually-oriented. More importantly, the forum posts are at moderators discretion. Obviously, they found it offensive and eventually did terminate his account. The fact he has now gone and created another account; which he did get caught: Message-ID: <_uSdnT-CVv_jJ0LWnZ2dnUVZ7oidnZ2d(a)bt.com> FYI - Malwarebytes is much sharper than Annexcafe - they *have* identified me and blocked my registration under my 'new' posting name .. I believe, Jenn, creating another account to evade a BAN set by an administrator is also against the terms of service. -- "Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...er...roll this...hrrngh.. nudge this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior |