Is MBAM is a 100% safe application?
in [Viruses]
|
From: Ant on 1 May 2010 13:53 "~BD~" wrote: > 1. The "False Authority Syndrome" > > Don't believe everything. Some people talk or write about viruses as if > they were an authority in this field, but in fact they are often not. > > Ref: http://www.claymania.com/info-fas.html The link to vmyths (for more about FAS) on that page is out of date. Use this: http://vmyths.com/fas/ which redirects to a PDF written by Rob Rosenberger. It's a bit dated now, talking about old msdos viruses and bulletin boards, but the wisdom is still sound. "The U.S. Air Force highlights the concept of False Authority Syndrome in Tongue & Quill, their official publication on effective writing: Nonexpert opinion or assumed authority - Don't be swayed (or try to sway someone else) based on the opinion of an unqualified authority. The Air Force is chock-full of people who, because of their position or authority in one field, are quoted on subjects in other fields for which they have limited or no experience. (As this Air Force publication notes, False Authority Syndrome can attack people in all fields of expertise.)". > My niggling concern has always been that > malware (call it what you will) might remain 'somewhere' within a box > ready to continue with it's malicious activity even though it's been > flattened and windows reinstalled (or even if a *new* hard disk has been > installed!). > > I suspect such thoughts came about from my contact and discussion with > our then High Tech Crime Unit - who recommended that I *destroy/trash* > the machine involved in my identity theft encounter. See the quote above. Police units dealing with computer crime are not authorities on malware. Their expertise is in gathering evidence (computer forensics) for possible prosecutions. They need to know where and what to look for on the system and, before they start, how to preserve or not corrupt that information. Sure, they may employ or consult experts who know something about particular malware in certain cases but did you communicate with one of these experts? More likely it was some desk sergeant or other front man whose job is not to educate the public about the finer points of fraudulent or malicious software but simply to give the safest and most general advice; i.e. trash the machine. In fact, that sounds like pretty dumb advice from anyone claiming to be an expert on malware. > The implication was > that there is much more going on 'behind the scenes'- things that the > authorities do not want the public to know about! There's no such implication - just your paranoid fantasies and conspiracy theories at work.
From: David H. Lipman on 1 May 2010 14:16 From: "Ant" <not(a)home.today> | "~BD~" wrote: >> 1. The "False Authority Syndrome" >> Don't believe everything. Some people talk or write about viruses as if >> they were an authority in this field, but in fact they are often not. >> Ref: http://www.claymania.com/info-fas.html | The link to vmyths (for more about FAS) on that page is out of date. | Use this: http://vmyths.com/fas/ which redirects to a PDF written by | Rob Rosenberger. It's a bit dated now, talking about old msdos viruses | and bulletin boards, but the wisdom is still sound. < snip > You don't see Robin on Usenet as much lately. For a short while he was posting malware humour. I was communicating with him offline not too long ago and I was pleasingly surprised that Robin and I have something in common. -- Dave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp
From: John Mason Jr on 1 May 2010 14:24 On 5/1/2010 7:19 AM, ~BD~ wrote: > Dustin Cook wrote: >> >> If the article claims an infection in the bios or eeprom vs corruption; >> then the article is indeed, wrong. BD. > > Thank you, Dustin. > >>> Take a step outside the box, David. >> >> Google bios and eeproms David. You might find it somewhat enlightening. > > I've done much research! > So ask specific questions based on your research, if you post links to where the information was obtained folks can look at the original material. Many folks have told you that in their opinion, and experience this behavior has not been observed in the wild. If you don't want the opinion of folks in the newgroup why would you continue to ask for it? John
From: ~BD~ on 1 May 2010 15:47 Ant wrote: > "~BD~" wrote: >> 1. The "False Authority Syndrome" >> >> Don't believe everything. Some people talk or write about viruses as if >> they were an authority in this field, but in fact they are often not. >> >> Ref: http://www.claymania.com/info-fas.html > > The link to vmyths (for more about FAS) on that page is out of date. > Use this: http://vmyths.com/fas/ which redirects to a PDF written by > Rob Rosenberger. It's a bit dated now, talking about old msdos viruses > and bulletin boards, but the wisdom is still sound. > > "The U.S. Air Force highlights the concept of False Authority Syndrome > in Tongue& Quill, their official publication on effective writing: > > Nonexpert opinion or assumed authority - Don't be swayed (or try to > sway someone else) based on the opinion of an unqualified authority. > The Air Force is chock-full of people who, because of their position > or authority in one field, are quoted on subjects in other fields > for which they have limited or no experience. > > (As this Air Force publication notes, False Authority Syndrome can > attack people in all fields of expertise.)". Thank you for the revision, Ant. The Conclusion in that document says, quote:- "I DON�T WANT to dispel any particular computer virus myths someone may have told you � that�s not my goal here. Rather, I want you to question a person�s expertise if he or she claims to speak with authority on computer viruses." >> My niggling concern has always been that >> malware (call it what you will) might remain 'somewhere' within a box >> ready to continue with it's malicious activity even though it's been >> flattened and windows reinstalled (or even if a *new* hard disk has been >> installed!). >> >> I suspect such thoughts came about from my contact and discussion with >> our then High Tech Crime Unit - who recommended that I *destroy/trash* >> the machine involved in my identity theft encounter. > > See the quote above. Police units dealing with computer crime are not > authorities on malware. Their expertise is in gathering evidence > (computer forensics) for possible prosecutions. They need to know > where and what to look for on the system and, before they start, how > to preserve or not corrupt that information. Sure, they may employ or > consult experts who know something about particular malware in certain > cases but did you communicate with one of these experts? More likely > it was some desk sergeant or other front man whose job is not to > educate the public about the finer points of fraudulent or malicious > software but simply to give the safest and most general advice; i.e. > trash the machine. In fact, that sounds like pretty dumb advice from > anyone claiming to be an expert on malware. You may well be right! >> The implication was >> that there is much more going on 'behind the scenes'- things that the >> authorities do not want the public to know about! > > There's no such implication - just your paranoid fantasies and > conspiracy theories at work. Maybe so. Tell me, then, about the expertise and 'qualifications' of Mr Lipman. I suspect that he's a 'professional' but seems reluctant to say so. You talk as if you *know* him! -- Dave
From: FromTheRafters on 1 May 2010 18:32
"~BD~" <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> wrote in message news:JOSdndli_pDIk0HWnZ2dnUVZ8vqdnZ2d(a)bt.com... [...] > At that link it says - quote:- > > "When you run the fdisk command to create, delete, or change a > partition, all of the data on that partition is permanently deleted". > > I've always understood that to mean that any malware would be > destroyed too! Bad sectors (or sectors *marked* as bad) in this case might be considered "outside" any partition. [...] > That is my understanding too. My niggling concern has always been that > malware (call it what you will) might remain 'somewhere' within a box > ready to continue with it's malicious activity even though it's been > flattened and windows reinstalled (or even if a *new* hard disk has > been installed!). Warning - - an analogy follows: Some vaguely described monster has finally been *killed* by the monster hunter and you have an uneasy feeling that the monster can rise from the blood at the scene of the killing. Well, it ain't gonna happen, but when you asked an expert if an entity like that could be resurrected from its blood - he said yes and told you about DNA and sheep, cats, etc... The thing is, the expert wasn't asked if the entity could self-resurrect from the blood left behind after the killing of the monster. |