Scanning a Mapped Drive on a LAN

Situation: Three machines running different platforms; WIN95, WIN98SE, XP
(new). The I mapped the main 98SE drive onto the XP machine. The 98SE has
scheduled scans from Norton's System Works and Personal Firewall. The new
machine runs McAfee VirusScan, Personal Firewall Plus, and Privacy Service.
I'm investigating "SpyBot" and "Ad-Ware" but know little of them at this
point. I threw the XP into a scan the other day and wondered why it was
taking so long. I found it scanning the drive I mapped from the 98SE. That
made me wonder what might happen if Norton and McAfee stated any kind of
scan at all at the same time the other was attempting to use the drive. Do I
have a potential conflict here or is the software sophisticated enough that
it will catch itself and avoid damage to ... well... anything? If not, any
recommendations? I didn't find provision to leave out the main drive from a
scan with either of the two programs.

John Gregory

In article <mu7_b.15366$>, jaygreg90
@hotmail.com says...
> Situation: Three machines running different platforms; WIN95, WIN98SE, XP
> (new). The I mapped the main 98SE drive onto the XP machine. The 98SE has
> scheduled scans from Norton's System Works and Personal Firewall. The new
> machine runs McAfee VirusScan, Personal Firewall Plus, and Privacy Service.
> I'm investigating "SpyBot" and "Ad-Ware" but know little of them at this
> point. I threw the XP into a scan the other day and wondered why it was
> taking so long. I found it scanning the drive I mapped from the 98SE. That
> made me wonder what might happen if Norton and McAfee stated any kind of
> scan at all at the same time the other was attempting to use the drive. Do I
> have a potential conflict here or is the software sophisticated enough that
> it will catch itself and avoid damage to ... well... anything? If not, any
> recommendations? I didn't find provision to leave out the main drive from a
> scan with either of the two programs.
>
>
>


a large portion of _all_ end-user type programs have the potential to
"do harm" if there's a conflict with another running application. for
instance: loops when running two anti-viruses at the same time. it's
always a good idea to "shut down", or at the very least, "make sure" two
apps aren't attempting to "scan" the same file system, at the same time.
this can lead to completely shutting down program "A" to allow program
"B" to do it's thing. anyone that tells you "it's fine" to do both at
once is potentially about to get you into trouble with your file system.



--
Colonel Flagg
http://www.internetwarzone.org/

Privacy at a click:
http://www.cotse.net

Q: How many Bill Gates does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None, he just defines Darkness? as the new industry standard..."

"...I see stupid people."

Colonel Flagg

Thanks Colonel. Would you have any suggestion of how to handle this? The
only thing I can think of is make one of those machines a completely manual
scan and place reminders on my Outlook calendar.

"Colonel Flagg" <> wrote in
message news:.. .
> In article <mu7_b.15366$>, jaygreg90
> @hotmail.com says...
> > Situation: Three machines running different platforms; WIN95, WIN98SE,
XP
> > (new). The I mapped the main 98SE drive onto the XP machine. The 98SE
has
> > scheduled scans from Norton's System Works and Personal Firewall. The
new
> > machine runs McAfee VirusScan, Personal Firewall Plus, and Privacy
Service.
> > I'm investigating "SpyBot" and "Ad-Ware" but know little of them at this
> > point. I threw the XP into a scan the other day and wondered why it was
> > taking so long. I found it scanning the drive I mapped from the 98SE.
That
> > made me wonder what might happen if Norton and McAfee stated any kind of
> > scan at all at the same time the other was attempting to use the drive.
Do I
> > have a potential conflict here or is the software sophisticated enough
that
> > it will catch itself and avoid damage to ... well... anything? If not,
any
> > recommendations? I didn't find provision to leave out the main drive
from a
> > scan with either of the two programs.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> a large portion of _all_ end-user type programs have the potential to
> "do harm" if there's a conflict with another running application. for
> instance: loops when running two anti-viruses at the same time. it's
> always a good idea to "shut down", or at the very least, "make sure" two
> apps aren't attempting to "scan" the same file system, at the same time.
> this can lead to completely shutting down program "A" to allow program
> "B" to do it's thing. anyone that tells you "it's fine" to do both at
> once is potentially about to get you into trouble with your file system.
>
>
>
> --
> Colonel Flagg
> http://www.internetwarzone.org/
>
> Privacy at a click:
> http://www.cotse.net
>
> Q: How many Bill Gates does it take to change a lightbulb?
> A: None, he just defines Darkness? as the new industry standard..."
>
> "...I see stupid people."

John Gregory

In article <aH8_b.15445$>, jaygreg90
@hotmail.com says...
> Thanks Colonel. Would you have any suggestion of how to handle this? The
> only thing I can think of is make one of those machines a completely manual
> scan and place reminders on my Outlook calendar.


I'd say do it by hand.... I have a "calendar" in my head to which I
refer to and remember to do my "manual scans" when it's time... even
though I automate many things on unix servers, I don't do the same on
Windows desktops.... there's so many things that go wrong, I just don't
trust Windows automation.





--
Colonel Flagg
http://www.internetwarzone.org/

Privacy at a click:
http://www.cotse.net

Q: How many Bill Gates does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None, he just defines Darkness? as the new industry standard..."

"...I see stupid people."

Colonel Flagg

"> Situation: Three machines running different platforms; WIN95, WIN98SE, XP

If you are running '95 or '98SE, then you are wide open
to hacking of all sorts, and there is not one program out
there that can stop it. If you haven't seen scanning of lan
drives before now, I can only assume you are new to
this. The very first thing you need to do is get rid of those
two machines. Nothing else needs to be said.

johns

johns

In article <c1dbtn$q5i$>,
says...
>
> "> Situation: Three machines running different platforms; WIN95, WIN98SE, XP
>
> If you are running '95 or '98SE, then you are wide open
> to hacking of all sorts, and there is not one program out
> there that can stop it. If you haven't seen scanning of lan
> drives before now, I can only assume you are new to
> this. The very first thing you need to do is get rid of those
> two machines. Nothing else needs to be said.

Um, since you don't know what is LAN to internet connection is setup as,
your statement could be untrue.

It's very easy to secure a W98 W98SE machine for use on the Internet.
Even easier running a personal firewall. Even easier for W95, W98, W98SE
if the person has a NAT router in front of them.

--
--

(Remove 999 to reply to me)

Leythos

My machines connect to the net via cable modem/router/switch/PCs. It's the
potential scanning conflicts of a mapped drive on the LAN that concerns me.
In addition, I'd like some opinions on Spybot and Ad-Ware running with
Norton SystemWorks and Personal Firewall; it has an ad block so I don't know
if that puts it into conflict with Ad-Ware or not.


"Leythos" <> wrote in message
news:...
> In article <c1dbtn$q5i$>,
> says...
> >
> > "> Situation: Three machines running different platforms; WIN95,
WIN98SE, XP
> >
> > If you are running '95 or '98SE, then you are wide open
> > to hacking of all sorts, and there is not one program out
> > there that can stop it. If you haven't seen scanning of lan
> > drives before now, I can only assume you are new to
> > this. The very first thing you need to do is get rid of those
> > two machines. Nothing else needs to be said.
>
> Um, since you don't know what is LAN to internet connection is setup as,
> your statement could be untrue.
>
> It's very easy to secure a W98 W98SE machine for use on the Internet.
> Even easier running a personal firewall. Even easier for W95, W98, W98SE
> if the person has a NAT router in front of them.
>
> --
> --
>
> (Remove 999 to reply to me)

John Gregory

> Um, since you don't know what is LAN to internet connection is setup as,
> your statement could be untrue.

Bullshit. I do this for a living.

johns

johns

> My machines connect to the net via cable modem/router/switch/PCs. It's the
> potential scanning conflicts of a mapped drive on the LAN that concerns
me.

Why? You are wide open to even kid stuff running W95, 98SE.
You don't know what you are doing. You need to can those OSes
as soon as possible. .

> In addition, I'd like some opinions on Spybot and Ad-Ware running

Neither one of those programs is effective as they claim. Both of
those programs only find pieces of the dropper, and you will
reinfect over and over. You are wasting your time on trivia.
You cannot do what you need to do for security in any degree
whatsoever running W95, 98SE. That is total nonsense.

johns

johns

>>Why? You are wide open to even kid stuff running W95, 98SE.
You don't know what you are doing. You need to can those OSes
as soon as possible. <<

Well, genious, let's hear your explanation instead of boasting you know it
all. I don't giove a damn WHAT you do for a living. I asked the question
because I DON'T know. Didn't need you to tell me that. If you can't offer a
civil explanation and advice, go play elsewhere! You've brought nothing
constructive to the thread so far.

"johns" <> wrote in message
news:c1hfsl$2pnb$...
>
> > My machines connect to the net via cable modem/router/switch/PCs. It's
the
> > potential scanning conflicts of a mapped drive on the LAN that concerns
> me.
>
> Why? You are wide open to even kid stuff running W95, 98SE.
> You don't know what you are doing. You need to can those OSes
> as soon as possible. .
>
> > In addition, I'd like some opinions on Spybot and Ad-Ware running
>
> Neither one of those programs is effective as they claim. Both of
> those programs only find pieces of the dropper, and you will
> reinfect over and over. You are wasting your time on trivia.
> You cannot do what you need to do for security in any degree
> whatsoever running W95, 98SE. That is total nonsense.
>
> johns
>
>

John Gregory