BugHunter Site Update

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Dustin Cook, Jul 8, 2006.

  1. Dustin Cook

    Dustin Cook Guest

    Hi All.

    Just a short note to let you know I've finally set the site back up the way
    it was on atspace. All documentation concerning Bughunter can be read
    online via the site. All links open in a seperate window.. You know the
    drill. Enjoy!


    --
    Dustin
    Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool
    http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
    Dustin Cook, Jul 8, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dustin Cook

    Mary Snow Guest

    Dustin Cook <> said in
    news:Xns97FA177AA74AEJAHD88W90A0DS@69.28.186.121:

    > Hi All.
    >
    > Just a short note to let you know I've finally set the site back up
    > the way it was on atspace. All documentation concerning Bughunter can
    > be read online via the site. All links open in a seperate window.. You
    > know the drill. Enjoy!



    Ewwwwwwww cor! Why would any one do a web page about nasty little creepy
    crawlers? I always hit them with the heel of my shoe when I see one in the
    House!

    Mary
    Mary Snow, Jul 8, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dustin Cook

    Dustin Cook Guest

    Mary Snow <> wrote in
    news:Xns97FA1C0F69D14snerdisanerd@217.22.228.20:

    > Ewwwwwwww cor! Why would any one do a web page about nasty little
    > creepy crawlers? I always hit them with the heel of my shoe when I see
    > one in the House!


    Haha.

    --
    Dustin
    Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool
    http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
    Dustin Cook, Jul 8, 2006
    #3
  4. Dustin Cook

    SgtMinor Guest

    Dustin Cook wrote:
    > Hi All.
    >
    > Just a short note to let you know I've finally set the site back up the way
    > it was on atspace. All documentation concerning Bughunter can be read
    > online via the site. All links open in a seperate window.. You know the
    > drill. Enjoy!
    >
    >


    If readability is important, consider black text on a white
    background. I clicked on your site, and was so turned off by the
    white on black that I spent less than three seconds looking at it.
    SgtMinor, Jul 8, 2006
    #4
  5. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    Dustin Cook <> wrote:

    |>Hi All.
    |>
    |>Just a short note to let you know I've finally set the site back up the way
    |>it was on atspace. All documentation concerning Bughunter can be read
    |>online via the site. All links open in a seperate window.. You know the
    |>drill. Enjoy!

    You might mention this is for Win98 only, yet has paths for a Win2000
    this is a work in progress (not Beta).

    Only thing keeps this from being a trojan is it doesn't install
    itself.

    This is a help group and folks should be aware this program could
    really screw them up.

    --
    http://www.google.com/microsoft
    , Jul 8, 2006
    #5
  6. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    SgtMinor wrote:

    > If readability is important, consider black text on a white
    > background. I clicked on your site, and was so turned off by the
    > white on black that I spent less than three seconds looking at it.


    Sorry.

    I'll look into that for you.
    , Jul 8, 2006
    #6
  7. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    wrote:


    > You might mention this is for Win98 only, yet has paths for a Win2000
    > this is a work in progress (not Beta).


    BugHunter isn't for win98 only, what made you think so? All programs
    are a work in progress, hun.

    > Only thing keeps this from being a trojan is it doesn't install
    > itself.


    In what possible way? BugHunter has been evaluated by many antivirus
    persons from alt.comp.virus and temerc.com, It's certainly not a
    trojan. Would you mind explaining why you seem to think it is?

    > This is a help group and folks should be aware this program could
    > really screw them up.


    This program won't screw them up anymore so then adaware, spybot or
    their respected antivirus program/firewall.

    I don't mind constructive critism, when it's correct.

    Regards,
    Dustin Cook
    http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
    , Jul 8, 2006
    #7
  8. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    SgtMinor wrote:

    > If readability is important, consider black text on a white
    > background.


    Fixed. Sorry about the readability issue. You shouldn't find the site
    such an eyesore at this point.

    --
    Regards,
    Dustin
    http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
    , Jul 8, 2006
    #8
  9. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    wrote:

    |>
    |> wrote:
    |>
    |>
    |>> You might mention this is for Win98 only, yet has paths for a Win2000
    |>> this is a work in progress (not Beta).
    |>
    |>BugHunter isn't for win98 only, what made you think so? All programs
    |>are a work in progress, hun.

    You really don't know...

    it will only run on C drive as does Win98 (ok you can get to another
    partition but it takes work) Your ini paths are Win98
    "C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND"

    |>> Only thing keeps this from being a trojan is it doesn't install
    |>> itself.

    |>In what possible way? BugHunter has been evaluated by many antivirus
    |>persons from alt.comp.virus and temerc.com, It's certainly not a
    |>trojan. Would you mind explaining why you seem to think it is?

    Running any of the REG files would screw anybody with their os on
    another Partition. The autoexec.bat is assuming too much to the point
    of having ADOBEC~1 (whatever that is) installed - none of these are my
    directories:

    (autoexec.nt)
    SET windir=C:\WINDOWS
    SET winbootdir=C:\WINDOWS
    SET COMSPEC=C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\COMMAND.COM
    SET PROMPT=$p$g
    SET TEMP=C:\WINDOWS\TEMP
    SET TMP=C:\WINDOWS\TEMP
    SET CLASSPATH=C:\PROGRA~1\PHOTOD~1.1\ADOBEC~1

    - even under Win98 my temp dirge was c:\temp

    |>> This is a help group and folks should be aware this program could
    |>> really screw them up.

    |>This program won't screw them up anymore so then adaware, spybot or
    |>their respected antivirus program/firewall.

    Your config.nt is even wrong - but you started to get a clue
    (%SystemRoot%\system32)

    dos=high, umb
    device=%SystemRoot%\system32\himem.sys
    files=40

    Himem.sys must be loaded first before dos can be placed high. This
    file is harmless as it won't do anything.


    |>I don't mind constructive critism, when it's correct.

    It needs work

    |>Regards,
    |>Dustin Cook
    |>http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk


    --
    Guy did it, started with a paper clip and traded up to a house
    http://oneredpaperclip.blogspot.com/
    , Jul 8, 2006
    #9
  10. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    , Jul 8, 2006
    #10
  11. Dustin Cook

    Dustin Guest

    wrote in
    news::

    > You might mention this is for Win98 only, yet has paths for a Win2000
    > this is a work in progress (not Beta).


    BugHunter works with virtually all versions of Windows, and is not
    designed for one over the other, as the documentation clearly states.
    Windows98 would have no use for *.NT files, which BugHunter includes for
    proper operation under win2k/xp. BugHunter will be updated as new malware
    samples are collected, and the engine may be updated as well to deal with
    them. BugHunter relies on technology similiar to that of a virus scanner,
    so there is a real need for occasionally updating it. It's retro-active.

    A work in progress, no, a security related utility with an updatable
    database and engine, yes.

    > Only thing keeps this from being a trojan is it doesn't install
    > itself.


    A trojan is a program which claims to do one thing, and does something
    else. BugHunter only does what I have said it will do in the
    documentation and online. The program has been examined by many in the
    antivirus/antispyware fields, and no trojan like activity has been
    reported thus far.

    > This is a help group and folks should be aware this program could
    > really screw them up.


    As such, people shouldn't mislead others either. I'm not sure if you did
    this intentionally or you just didn't understand the documentation...

    --
    Dustin
    Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool
    http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
    Dustin, Jul 8, 2006
    #11
  12. Dustin Cook

    Dustin Guest

    wrote in news:6p30b21k72aajd4h3i1afp615l40t8de39
    @4ax.com:

    > it will only run on C drive as does Win98 (ok you can get to another
    > partition but it takes work) Your ini paths are Win98
    > "C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND"


    I really think you missed this:
    (it's in the documentation, and the .ini file plainly states recursive is
    on by default.)

    By Default, BugHunter is preset to do a fully recursive scan on any
    drives connected or mapped to your computer. This will cause a slight
    delay and a notice to appear on your screen, informing you of the data
    collection process. BugHunter is having LOCATE.COM map your directories
    and store this information into a temporary file for BugHunter's use.

    > Running any of the REG files would screw anybody with their os on
    > another Partition. The autoexec.bat is assuming too much to the point
    > of having ADOBEC~1 (whatever that is) installed - none of these are my
    > directories:


    The *.nt files are not .reg files, they are rarely required, and you
    should only use mine if you don't actually have them. Windows will
    complain they are missing when you try to run bughunter if you don't.

    FIXSPY.REG won't screw anybody with anything, actually.

    REGEDIT4

    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer
    \SharedTaskScheduler]
    "{D1A2E7CD-F5C1-21A8-CA2C-13D0AC72D19D}"=-
    "{A2D9D3F0-8C2A-2A1D-A376-1BECFB10AB72}"=-
    "{24c60b9b-26b5-4201-9f7a-fb9219356ae9}"=-
    "{64ba30a2-811a-4597-b0af-d551128be340}"=-
    "{70fbd528-2d3c-4a00-9b8c-bbf441e534be}"=-

    [-HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID\{D1A2E7CD-F5C1-21A8-CA2C-
    13D0AC72D19D}]
    [-HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID\{A2D9D3F0-8C2A-2A1D-A376-
    1BECFB10AB72}]
    [-HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID\{24c60b9b-26b5-4201-9f7a-
    fb9219356ae9}]
    [-HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID\{64ba30a2-811a-4597-b0af-
    d551128be340}]
    [-HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID\{70fbd528-2d3c-4a00-9b8c-
    bbf441e534be}]


    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run]
    "SpyFalcon"=-
    "SpyAxe"=-

    It has no hard coded partition references, it's designed to remove bogus
    SpywareFalcon/spaxe/spyware quake bubble error windows found on windows
    xp.


    The 2klogin.reg and xplogin.reg do assume default partitions and
    installations, but they can be edited if this doesn't match the users
    needs. The chances of actually having to use them tho are fairly small.
    That particular malware program isn't seen much itw anymore.

    > (autoexec.nt)
    > SET windir=C:\WINDOWS
    > SET winbootdir=C:\WINDOWS
    > SET COMSPEC=C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\COMMAND.COM
    > SET PROMPT=$p$g
    > SET TEMP=C:\WINDOWS\TEMP
    > SET TMP=C:\WINDOWS\TEMP
    > SET CLASSPATH=C:\PROGRA~1\PHOTOD~1.1\ADOBEC~1
    >
    > - even under Win98 my temp dirge was c:\temp
    >
    >|>> This is a help group and folks should be aware this program could
    >|>> really screw them up.
    >
    >|>This program won't screw them up anymore so then adaware, spybot or
    >|>their respected antivirus program/firewall.
    >
    > Your config.nt is even wrong - but you started to get a clue
    > (%SystemRoot%\system32)


    The user can simply create two 0byte files with the names config.nt and
    autoexec.nt and place them into the windows system32 folder to allow
    bughunter to execute. The files i include are just to allow bughunter to
    run, they should not be used for anything else; and this is covered in
    the documentation. IE: BugHunter doesn't use high memory.

    > It needs work


    So far, you've pointed out one problem with one registry file, and two
    minor issues with the included .nt files. I'll be happy to consider your
    suggestions for the included support files, but I don't think you'll find
    that BugHunter is harmful. I do however recommend reading the
    documentation before you use the program.


    --
    Dustin
    Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool
    http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
    Dustin, Jul 8, 2006
    #12
  13. said in
    news::

    > Dustin Cook <> wrote:
    >
    >|>Hi All.
    >|>
    >|>Just a short note to let you know I've finally set the site back up
    >|>the way it was on atspace. All documentation concerning Bughunter can
    >|>be read online via the site. All links open in a seperate window..
    >|>You know the drill. Enjoy!
    >
    > You might mention this is for Win98 only, yet has paths for a Win2000
    > this is a work in progress (not Beta).
    >
    > Only thing keeps this from being a trojan is it doesn't install
    > itself.
    >
    > This is a help group and folks should be aware this program could
    > really screw them up.
    >


    While you're at it, will you shave your ass and paint it red?

    Rectum Burrrn
    Rectum Burnne, Jul 9, 2006
    #13
  14. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    wrote:

    > |>> You might mention this is for Win98 only, yet has paths for a Win2000
    > |>> this is a work in progress (not Beta).
    > |>
    > |>BugHunter isn't for win98 only, what made you think so? All programs
    > |>are a work in progress, hun.
    >
    > You really don't know...
    >
    > it will only run on C drive as does Win98 (ok you can get to another
    > partition but it takes work) Your ini paths are Win98
    > "C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND"


    That's also the default windows XP installation folder, as is windows
    ME. I've snipped the rest since I've already responded to it
    previously.

    The other ini file is preset for c:\winnt, default installation folder
    for win2k,nt4.
    , Jul 9, 2006
    #14
  15. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    Dustin <> wrote:

    |>> This is a help group and folks should be aware this program could
    |>> really screw them up.

    |>As such, people shouldn't mislead others either. I'm not sure if you did
    |>this intentionally or you just didn't understand the documentation...

    Hey I wish you luck on this, but it's not ready for prime time.

    Practicing Safe hex one does not run 9k files that look like this:

    ***** ANSI SECTION *****

    000001DB: Lc QH
    00000236: Ws
    2
    0000032E: U7SPr
    00000461: RHYi
    00000706: 7C d
    00000760: 2eD
    00000783: yaaO
    00000805: lmoJ
    00000C61: hOOH
    00000D64: LBYC
    00001032: OPXQR
    00001071: XSQ3
    00001119: 3sUc
    00001156: WUVo
    000011A5: Ccom
    000011D4: BUGcH
    000011EB: Fg d
    000011F1: ahse.
    00001210: fYl
    00001216: vsjm
    00001276: xmN0
    000012E7: nsMloMd
    00001314: FULb7CR
    00001327: done
    00001348:
    rec2to
    0000135A: Bma
    00001368: Yuws.
    0000137D: hienc#
    0000139A: .a0I1
    000013AA: O9ly
    000013B3:
    dI
    -
    000013BF: F0lw
    00001479: #7 T4m
    000014C1: [
    dLO
    000014FD: sult
    00001557: tJFC
    000015AA: RXFIw
    0000167E:
    4plNM
    0000169A: vbx
    00001742: CIkt
    0000176A: !dwfr
    00001778: VW0M9Mk
    000017EA: FtCW
    00001809: K yWIN
    00001864: D IRrML4
    0000187E: NHrm
    000018D8: ekJG
    000018F9: J
    uIl
    00001A68: LnEW
    00001ACB: 1SQRW
    00001B42: OMSPEe
    00001BBE: GC
    Iu
    00001C35: GUws0
    00001CEE: 0GVz
    00001D05: ┬░LAL4
    00001E27: HFB0
    00001EC0: KdVP+
    00001F73: VW0R
    00001FD3: i52Z
    00002089: XSQ3
    00002167: +0qr4:
    00002171: WUQV


    ***** UNICODE SECTION *****



    --
    http://www.newscientistspace.com/article.ns?id=mg18524911.600
    , Jul 9, 2006
    #15
  16. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    wrote:

    > Hey I wish you luck on this, but it's not ready for prime time.


    Hehe, It's not intended to replace the tools already available, it's
    designed to accompany them. For users who find console a frightening
    place to be, it's not going to go over well with them anyway. For users
    who are comfortable repairing computers at slightly more then a novice
    skill level, BugHunter shouldn't be any trouble to make use of.

    > Practicing Safe hex one does not run 9k files that look like this:
    >
    > ***** ANSI SECTION *****

    [snip]

    Both the executable and it's database resist snooping and tampering by
    those with a hex editor or debugger. You won't find any value hex
    editing either of them. 9kilobytes is efficient programming in DOS,
    not Windows. :) BugHunter only contains what it needs to do as it's
    designed. In fact, it could be made smaller if I had wrote it entirely
    in assembler. The database however will soon be larger than the
    executable currently is. I have no issues with your safe hex, if your
    untrusting of the program and you have access to vmware, run it under
    that environment, you should find it's quiet harmless.

    Btw, I have altered the .nt files to be suitable regardless of your
    installation path, and i've adjusted the documentation to stress that
    the included 2klogin and xplogin.reg files are hardcoded for default
    installations and must be edited before use if that is not so with the
    users system.

    An upcoming change may create the files as needed on the fly with the
    installation path already coded for the user. You will be credited in
    the documentation for the suggestion, if you'd like?

    --
    Regards,
    Dustin
    Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool
    http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
    , Jul 9, 2006
    #16
  17. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    wrote:

    |>
    |> wrote:
    |>
    |>> Hey I wish you luck on this, but it's not ready for prime time.
    |>
    |>Hehe, It's not intended to replace the tools already available, it's
    |>designed to accompany them. For users who find console a frightening
    |>place to be, it's not going to go over well with them anyway. For users
    |>who are comfortable repairing computers at slightly more then a novice
    |>skill level, BugHunter shouldn't be any trouble to make use of.
    |>
    |>> Practicing Safe hex one does not run 9k files that look like this:
    |>>
    |>> ***** ANSI SECTION *****
    |>[snip]
    |>
    |>Both the executable and it's database resist snooping and tampering by
    |>those with a hex editor or debugger.

    It's been encrypted, I know and why I won't...

    |>You won't find any value hex
    |>editing either of them. 9kilobytes is efficient programming in DOS,
    |>not Windows. :) BugHunter only contains what it needs to do as it's
    |>designed. In fact, it could be made smaller if I had wrote it entirely
    |>in assembler. The database however will soon be larger than the
    |>executable currently is. I have no issues with your safe hex, if your
    |>untrusting of the program and you have access to vmware, run it under
    |>that environment, you should find it's quiet harmless.
    |>
    |>Btw, I have altered the .nt files to be suitable regardless of your
    |>installation path, and i've adjusted the documentation to stress that
    |>the included 2klogin and xplogin.reg files are hardcoded for default
    |>installations and must be edited before use if that is not so with the
    |>users system.
    |>
    |>An upcoming change may create the files as needed on the fly with the
    |>installation path already coded for the user. You will be credited in
    |>the documentation for the suggestion, if you'd like?

    SET COMSPEC=%SystemRoot%\SYSTEM32\COMMAND.COM
    Doesn't work under XP
    (your program is going to have to use CMD)

    A DOS way to screw with someone was to type PATH - nothing would work
    after that, as it removed all the paths and a reboot was in order.

    Specifying a path in your autoexec.nt will do the same; erase the
    users paths and use what the autoexec.nt has (the wrong ones)

    If a user needs autoexec.nt or config.nt it will already be installed.

    The Config.nt wasn't your fault, MS got it wrong - I forgot about
    that.



    --
    Old Lady Pownz Mercedes Guy
    http://tinyurl.com/mm9u6
    , Jul 9, 2006
    #17
  18. Dustin Cook

    ellis_jay Guest

    wrote:
    > wrote:
    >
    >>>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Hey I wish you luck on this, but it's not ready for prime time.
    >>>
    >>> Hehe, It's not intended to replace the tools already available, it's
    >>> designed to accompany them. For users who find console a frightening
    >>> place to be, it's not going to go over well with them anyway. For
    >>> users who are comfortable repairing computers at slightly more then
    >>> a novice skill level, BugHunter shouldn't be any trouble to make
    >>> use of.
    >>>
    >>>> Practicing Safe hex one does not run 9k files that look like this:
    >>>>
    >>>> ***** ANSI SECTION *****
    >>> [snip]
    >>>
    >>> Both the executable and it's database resist snooping and tampering
    >>> by those with a hex editor or debugger.

    >
    > It's been encrypted, I know and why I won't...
    >
    >>> You won't find any value hex
    >>> editing either of them. 9kilobytes is efficient programming in DOS,
    >>> not Windows. :) BugHunter only contains what it needs to do as it's
    >>> designed. In fact, it could be made smaller if I had wrote it
    >>> entirely in assembler. The database however will soon be larger
    >>> than the executable currently is. I have no issues with your safe
    >>> hex, if your untrusting of the program and you have access to
    >>> vmware, run it under that environment, you should find it's quiet
    >>> harmless.
    >>>
    >>> Btw, I have altered the .nt files to be suitable regardless of your
    >>> installation path, and i've adjusted the documentation to stress
    >>> that the included 2klogin and xplogin.reg files are hardcoded for
    >>> default installations and must be edited before use if that is not
    >>> so with the users system.
    >>>
    >>> An upcoming change may create the files as needed on the fly with
    >>> the installation path already coded for the user. You will be
    >>> credited in the documentation for the suggestion, if you'd like?

    >
    > SET COMSPEC=%SystemRoot%\SYSTEM32\COMMAND.COM
    > Doesn't work under XP
    > (your program is going to have to use CMD)
    >
    > A DOS way to screw with someone was to type PATH - nothing would work
    > after that, as it removed all the paths and a reboot was in order.
    >
    > Specifying a path in your autoexec.nt will do the same; erase the
    > users paths and use what the autoexec.nt has (the wrong ones)
    >
    > If a user needs autoexec.nt or config.nt it will already be installed.
    >
    > The Config.nt wasn't your fault, MS got it wrong - I forgot about
    > that.


    Well, someone knows what the hell you and the Bughunter guy are
    babbling -and it sure the hell ain't me!!--But a good
    read..................I will leave the programming stuff to you'zzs-and walk
    on the stay on my side of my world.

    "Ain't usage great?"
    ____PimpDaddy

    --

    Let the unseen day be. Today is more than enough.

    ___Sador the carpenter to Turin
    Tolkien, The Unfinished Tales

    Ellis_Jay
    ellis_jay, Jul 9, 2006
    #18
  19. Dustin Cook

    Guest

    wrote:

    > SET COMSPEC=%SystemRoot%\SYSTEM32\COMMAND.COM
    > Doesn't work under XP
    > (your program is going to have to use CMD)


    Actually, it does. BugHunter can make use of almost any command
    interpreter, cmd.exe or command.com make no difference for it. I've
    already tested the .nt files before repackaging them, they work.

    > A DOS way to screw with someone was to type PATH - nothing would work
    > after that, as it removed all the paths and a reboot was in order.


    A reboot was in order for what? Just run autoexec.bat again...

    > Specifying a path in your autoexec.nt will do the same; erase the
    > users paths and use what the autoexec.nt has (the wrong ones)


    The autoexec.nt file is only for that session, it's not a global
    effect.

    > If a user needs autoexec.nt or config.nt it will already be installed.


    Not necessarily true. If the oem/vendor thought ahead of time, yes.
    Otherwise, no. If I didn't have to include some mention and default
    files for systems that didn't come with it, I wouldn't. That's not the
    case however. The .nt files included with bughunter are only to be used
    to get bughunter up and running, they shouldn't be relied on to get
    your old dos games access to your soundcard under emulation. If a user
    has to use my files, he or she isn't missing dos anyway.

    > The Config.nt wasn't your fault, MS got it wrong - I forgot about
    > that.


    I didn't think it was worth making a big deal over. :)
    , Jul 9, 2006
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Dustin Cook

    BugHunter Site Update [Windows Antimalware tool]

    Dustin Cook, Jul 8, 2006, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    484
    Anonyma
    Jul 8, 2006
  2. Dustin

    BugHunter Pattern Update (07-10-2006)

    Dustin, Jul 11, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    397
  3. BugHunter Pattern Update (07-19-2006)

    , Jul 20, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    44
    Views:
    1,168
    Dustin
    Jul 27, 2006
  4. Dustin
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    421
    Dustin
    Jul 27, 2006
  5. Dustin

    BugHunter Pattern Update (08-10-2006)

    Dustin, Aug 10, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    543
    Rhonda Lea Kirk
    Aug 10, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page