Who checks the malware fighters?
in [Spyware]
|
Prev: Jenn
Next: Spyware Blaster databse update | 19 Apr 2010
From: John Mason Jr on 19 Apr 2010 10:56 On 4/19/2010 4:40 AM, ~BD~ wrote: > BD said > >> Maybe someone like David Kaye has the experience to determine if a >> machine is actually clean after installing and running MBAM. Someone, >> surely, has carried out an independent check to give such a widely >> used >> facility a clean bill of health. Whilst MBAM is obviously highly >> effective at removing 'malware' why is it considered impossible for >> the >> downloaded software to leave its own gremlin within the cleaned >> machine? > > Dustin Cook said > > Malwarebytes has thousands of happy users, gets praise every single day > on many forums; continues to be one of the top rated downloads for > antimalware at cnet.com. What you claim just doesn't jive with reality. > Your consiperacy theory BS aside, that is. > > ****** > > My question remains unanswered. > > I'm *not* claiming anything - just seeking the truth! > If you were really seeking the truth you would find a reputable firm to do the analysis you want and pay them. Actually to make sure you get the right results contract 3 firms separately, be sure to post the results when you are done. John
From: Dustin Cook on 19 Apr 2010 15:13 "~BD~" <BoaterDave.NoSpam(a)Hotmail.co.uk> wrote in news:hqh4th$pg8$1 @news.eternal-september.org: > BD said > >> Maybe someone like David Kaye has the experience to determine if a >> machine is actually clean after installing and running MBAM. Someone, >> surely, has carried out an independent check to give such a widely >> used >> facility a clean bill of health. Whilst MBAM is obviously highly >> effective at removing 'malware' why is it considered impossible for >> the >> downloaded software to leave its own gremlin within the cleaned >> machine? > > Dustin Cook said > > Malwarebytes has thousands of happy users, gets praise every single day > on many forums; continues to be one of the top rated downloads for > antimalware at cnet.com. What you claim just doesn't jive with reality. > Your consiperacy theory BS aside, that is. > > ****** > > My question remains unanswered. > > I'm *not* claiming anything - just seeking the truth! Your question has no basis in reality, Dave. You took the koolaid from your code thieving pissant pcbutts and ran with it. You aren't seeking anything. Your just trying to incite issues between myself and you. All because I wouldn't answer your stupid questions. -- "Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...er...roll this...hrrngh.. nudge this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior
From: Dustin Cook on 19 Apr 2010 15:14 "Jenn" <me(a)nowhere.whocareswhatthisemailisanyway> wrote in news:hqhprl$tle$1(a)news.eternal-september.org: > "Mike Easter" <MikeE(a)ster.invalid> wrote in message > news:83350kFrb1U1(a)mid.individual.net... >> ~BD~ wrote: > <snip> >> mbam had a legal conflict with IOBit, claiming iobit infringed IP. >> During that battle would have been a good time for iobit to claim >> that mbam harbored 'gremlins', but it did not. It only claimed that >> it didn't intentionally infringe IP and that remedies had been taken >> about mbam's concerns. >> > > > What does *infringe IP* mean? IP=intellectual property. IOBit reverse engineered mbams database and used alot of it, line for line; as was copy/pasted from ours. Infringe means they used it, without permission. -- "Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...er...roll this...hrrngh.. nudge this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior
From: Dustin Cook on 19 Apr 2010 15:16 John Mason Jr <notvalid(a)cox.net.invalid> wrote in news:hqhqvq$i2p$1(a)news.eternal-september.org: > On 4/19/2010 4:40 AM, ~BD~ wrote: >> BD said >> >>> Maybe someone like David Kaye has the experience to determine if a >>> machine is actually clean after installing and running MBAM. >>> Someone, surely, has carried out an independent check to give such a >>> widely used >>> facility a clean bill of health. Whilst MBAM is obviously highly >>> effective at removing 'malware' why is it considered impossible for >>> the >>> downloaded software to leave its own gremlin within the cleaned >>> machine? >> >> Dustin Cook said >> >> Malwarebytes has thousands of happy users, gets praise every single >> day on many forums; continues to be one of the top rated downloads >> for antimalware at cnet.com. What you claim just doesn't jive with >> reality. Your consiperacy theory BS aside, that is. >> >> ****** >> >> My question remains unanswered. >> >> I'm *not* claiming anything - just seeking the truth! >> > > If you were really seeking the truth you would find a reputable firm > to do the analysis you want and pay them. > > Actually to make sure you get the right results contract 3 firms > separately, be sure to post the results when you are done. > > John When he's finished with that, I'd like a nice full formal apology on behalf of mbam and myself for the innuendo remarks. Well, I'll take the one for me, mbam can deal with him on their own time. :) -- "Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...er...roll this...hrrngh.. nudge this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior
From: Dustin Cook on 19 Apr 2010 15:17
"~BD~" <BoaterDave.NoSpam(a)Hotmail.co.uk> wrote in news:hqh4th$pg8$1 @news.eternal-september.org: > BD said [nothing you idiot, he's dead locked in my basement] -eminem. :) Am I the only malware fighter you can dig up any old dirt on? is that why you target me with your posts BD? Your not seeking truth, in any possible way shape or form. -- "Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...er...roll this...hrrngh.. nudge this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior |