Hacked???

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Squirrel, Aug 19, 2005.

  1. Squirrel

    Squirrel Guest

    Good reason to believe I have been hacked by someone we all know so
    very well, any way to indulge my paranoia I installed a firewall, and
    just wondered, if I get a big security breach, does this mean it could
    possibly be a hacker, and does the ISP address potentially lead you to
    finding out who it is??

    Also, cannot get latest MSN (7 Ithink) to work with it up, Version 4
    point something will run, and does the deed, but I would prefer the
    other, any ideas?

    Squirrel
     
    Squirrel, Aug 19, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Squirrel

    Brendan Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:52:02 +1200, Squirrel wrote:

    >>You must have had one allready, XP?
    >>

    > Forgot to say, might just flag the freebies and get the latest Norton
    > which has a good firewall I am told


    No it is not. Norton's has become bloated and buggy. It will slow your
    computer down and cause you a lot of trouble. Any norton's.

    The built in xp firewall is sufficient for most people.

    The Ip address you gave referrs to your LAN card, and is not any use.

    What makes you think you are hacked ?

    It is more likely you have spyware bot's running on your system. Try
    scanning for them with both ad-aware (lavasoft) and Spybot Search and
    destroy. Be aware there are a lot of simularly named programs out there,
    all of them are scams. The real deals are free and will kill most spyware.

    Do two scans each, one after you re-boot the machine. Any that re-appear
    will need special attention.

    Use www.free-av.com for an anti virus.

    --

    .... Brendan

    #104052 +(6651)- [X]

    <NES> lol
    <NES> I download something from Napster
    <NES> And the same guy I downloaded it from starts downloading it from me
    when I'm done
    <NES> I message him and say "What are you doing? I just got that from you"
    <NES> "getting my song back fucker"


    Note: All my comments are copyright 20/08/2005 1:39:43 p.m. and are opinion only where not otherwise stated and always "to the best of my recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
     
    Brendan, Aug 20, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Squirrel

    Enkidu Guest

    Brendan wrote:
    >
    > No it is not. Norton's has become bloated and buggy.
    > It will slow your computer down and cause you a lot
    > of trouble. Any norton's.
    >

    Well, my experience is different. I've run the Corporate
    Edition on 100s of PCs with no problems for years.

    It's the one I keep coming back to when the others fail, one
    way or another. I've tried free ones, paid for ones, and I
    keep coming back to Norton AV.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com
     
    Enkidu, Aug 20, 2005
    #3
  4. Squirrel

    EMB Guest

    Enkidu wrote:

    > Well, my experience is different. I've run the Corporate Edition on 100s
    > of PCs with no problems for years.
    >
    > It's the one I keep coming back to when the others fail, one way or
    > another. I've tried free ones, paid for ones, and I keep coming back to
    > Norton AV.
    >


    Seconded. I look after about 150 PCs running Norton/Symantec Orporate
    AV and there never seem to be any issues either with antivirus
    performance or system resources.


    --
    EMB
     
    EMB, Aug 20, 2005
    #4
  5. Squirrel

    Bling-Bling Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:52:02 +1200, Squirrel wrote:

    >>> any way to indulge my paranoia I installed a firewall,

    >>
    >>You must have had one allready, XP?
    >>

    > Forgot to say, might just flag the freebies and get the latest Norton
    > which has a good firewall I am told


    On Micro$oft boxes all you need is to install the Zonealarm firewall. It
    is very good indeed.


    Bling Bling

    --
    Fink: "The Linux market is growing 30% to 35% a year."
     
    Bling-Bling, Aug 20, 2005
    #5
  6. Squirrel

    Bret Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:20:48 +1200, Bling-Bling
    <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:52:02 +1200, Squirrel wrote:
    >
    >>>> any way to indulge my paranoia I installed a firewall,
    >>>
    >>>You must have had one allready, XP?
    >>>

    >> Forgot to say, might just flag the freebies and get the latest Norton
    >> which has a good firewall I am told

    >
    >On Micro$oft boxes all you need is to install the Zonealarm firewall. It
    >is very good indeed.
    >
    >
    >Bling Bling


    Idiot
     
    Bret, Aug 20, 2005
    #6
  7. Squirrel

    Squirrel Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 13:23:40 +1200, Bret <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:51:03 +1200, Squirrel <>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:03:22 +1200, Bret <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:26:24 +1200, Squirrel <>
    >>>wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Good reason to believe I have been hacked by someone we all know so
    >>>>very well,
    >>>
    >>>No idea who you are referring to.

    >>
    >>Been here long?

    >
    >Longer than you have Squirel :)


    And you have no idea? ;)
    >
    >>>> any way to indulge my paranoia I installed a firewall,
    >>>
    >>>You must have had one allready, XP?

    >>
    >>I was told it was crap
    >>>
    >>>> and
    >>>>just wondered, if I get a big security breach, does this mean it could
    >>>>possibly be a hacker, and does the ISP address potentially lead you to
    >>>>finding out who it is??
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Have you got an IP address?

    >>
    >>Name Realtek RTL8139 Family PCI Fast Ethernet NIC -
    >>Packet Scheduler Miniport
    >>Zone Internet
    >>Entry Type Adapter Subnet
    >>IP Address / Site 10.1.1.3/255.0.0.0
    >>
    >>I have no idea what any of it means :)
    >>
    >>Squirrel

    >
    >Not of any use.
    >What actually happened?


    Just popped up at 8.05 as serious security breach not from trusted,
    but from Internet

    Squirrel
     
    Squirrel, Aug 20, 2005
    #7
  8. Squirrel

    Squirrel Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:48:30 +1200, EMB <> wrote:

    >Enkidu wrote:
    >
    >> Well, my experience is different. I've run the Corporate Edition on 100s
    >> of PCs with no problems for years.
    >>
    >> It's the one I keep coming back to when the others fail, one way or
    >> another. I've tried free ones, paid for ones, and I keep coming back to
    >> Norton AV.
    >>

    >
    >Seconded. I look after about 150 PCs running Norton/Symantec Orporate
    >AV and there never seem to be any issues either with antivirus
    >performance or system resources.


    Thirded, used hosts of others, always come back to Norton

    Squirrel
     
    Squirrel, Aug 20, 2005
    #8
  9. Squirrel

    H.O.G Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:20:48 +1200, Bling-Bling
    <> spoke these fine words:

    >On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:52:02 +1200, Squirrel wrote:
    >
    >>>> any way to indulge my paranoia I installed a firewall,
    >>>
    >>>You must have had one allready, XP?
    >>>

    >> Forgot to say, might just flag the freebies and get the latest Norton
    >> which has a good firewall I am told

    >
    >On Micro$oft boxes all you need is to install the Zonealarm firewall. It
    >is very good indeed.
    >
    >
    >Bling Bling


    Maybe in Blingland.

    Not in the real world.
     
    H.O.G, Aug 20, 2005
    #9
  10. Squirrel

    Brendan Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:20:48 +1200, Bling-Bling wrote:

    >> Forgot to say, might just flag the freebies and get the latest Norton
    >> which has a good firewall I am told

    >
    > On Micro$oft boxes all you need is to install the Zonealarm firewall. It
    > is very good indeed.


    Squirrel, do not install zone alarm. It is trouble.

    There are plenty of other, better ones. For free.

    --

    .... Brendan

    #287414 +(10542)- [X]

    <DeadMansHand> haha, last night, me and pete went out to celebrate his
    engagement and got hugely drunk
    <DeadMansHand> we got this great idea to bury eachother in the sand close
    to the water and see who would chicken out first
    <DeadMansHand> took about a half hour, but the water got up to my face so i
    freaked and got out
    <DeadMansHand> i looked around for pete and he must've chickened out before
    me and stumbled home or something heh
    <DeadMansHand> What'd he say when he woke up this morning?
    <Thirteen-> uhh.. he hasn't come home yet.. i thought he was staying with
    you?
    <DeadMansHand> holy ****.
    <DeadMansHand> i fucking hope im wrong about what im thinking right now
    <DeadMansHand> im fucking going back to the beach to make sure
    <DeadMansHand> if he gets home, call me, i don't want to be worrying about
    this
    <Thirteen-> will do. you better hope he's not still buried, you'll be in
    deep shit.
    quit: (DeadMansHand)
    <Tyran> wtf? pete came home last night you ****. Ken's going to be worrying
    about this shit all day
    <Thirteen-> haha yea, but it will be fun while it lasts
    join: (PeteRepeat) (bob@3F8C4655.11D1C8C.18637D35.IP)
    <PeteRepeat> fucking ken
    <PeteRepeat> ken... that fucker buried me in the sand last night, i ran off
    about 5 minutes to it, left him there to be an idiot
    <quiqsilver> pete, ken didn't come back last night, i thought he was with
    you.
    <PeteRepeat> oh ****.
    <PeteRepeat> if ken shows up, make sure he doesn't know that im at the
    beach digging for his body. i don't want him to think i care or anything.
    quit: (PeteRepeat)
    <Thirteen-> rofl. Those 2 are going to get a huge surprise when they meet
    at the beach.
    <Tyran> i can't beleive how perfect their timing was


    Note: All my comments are copyright 20/08/2005 7:36:00 p.m. and are opinion only where not otherwise stated and always "to the best of my recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
     
    Brendan, Aug 20, 2005
    #10
  11. Squirrel

    Brendan Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:40:49 +1200, Enkidu wrote:

    > Well, my experience is different. I've run the Corporate
    > Edition on 100s of PCs with no problems for years.
    >
    > It's the one I keep coming back to when the others fail, one
    > way or another. I've tried free ones, paid for ones, and I
    > keep coming back to Norton AV.


    Most of the PC's I repair have Norton's installed.

    1. All of them require 6 monthly fee's to be paid.

    2. All of them have had viruses and trojans on them.

    3. All of them have been very slow.

    4. Some of them have not worked properly until norton's is uninstalled.

    Furthermore, I have run Norton's many different times myself. I have always
    been annoyed at the hoops you have to go to to getting it installed and up
    to date the first time, and it's general intrusive nature.

    So, I will install anti-vir, which has the same rate of detection as
    Norton's does according to official testing at independent test facilities.

    I have done so for a number of years. None of my customer's have any
    complaints. When they bring there machines back months later (spyware), I
    will run a scan. No viruses.

    People are free to install Norton's. No skin off my nose, more work for me
    later. But I do not see the point when other, free software does as well.

    Oh, and take any criticism of the norton av and treble it for norton system
    works.

    --

    .... Brendan

    #400459 +(4206)- [X]

    <Sonium> someone speak python here?
    <lucky> HHHHHSSSSSHSSS
    <lucky> SSSSS
    <Sonium> the programming language


    Note: All my comments are copyright 20/08/2005 7:27:24 p.m. and are opinion only where not otherwise stated and always "to the best of my recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
     
    Brendan, Aug 20, 2005
    #11
  12. Squirrel

    H.O.G Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 20:21:34 +1200, Brendan <>
    spoke these fine words:

    >On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:40:49 +1200, Enkidu wrote:
    >
    >> Well, my experience is different. I've run the Corporate
    >> Edition on 100s of PCs with no problems for years.
    >>
    >> It's the one I keep coming back to when the others fail, one
    >> way or another. I've tried free ones, paid for ones, and I
    >> keep coming back to Norton AV.

    >
    >Most of the PC's I repair have Norton's installed.


    Ever stop to think that maybe that's because they're by far the
    largest antivirus software vendor?

    >1. All of them require 6 monthly fee's to be paid.


    I've yet to see one that requires 6 monthly fees. Are you sure you
    know what you are talking about?

    >2. All of them have had viruses and trojans on them.


    Maybe that's why you have seen them? Ever thought that, if you work in
    a PC workshop, you are going to see a large portion of machines with
    viruses and other problems?

    Fact is, no antivirus software will give your machine total protection
    from viruses. There is always a delay between when the virus is
    released, and when the antivirus software's updates are available.
    Symantec spends many millions of dollars a year ensuring that that
    window is smaller than with any other solution.

    >3. All of them have been very slow.


    Again, that is based on the PCs you see, not the PCs out there.

    >4. Some of them have not worked properly until norton's is uninstalled.


    See all points above.

    >Furthermore, I have run Norton's many different times myself. I have always
    >been annoyed at the hoops you have to go to to getting it installed and up
    >to date the first time, and it's general intrusive nature.


    It's not hard. You install it, then you run Live Update, and it
    automatically updates itself. What's so tricky about that?

    >So, I will install anti-vir, which has the same rate of detection as
    >Norton's does according to official testing at independent test facilities.


    That's rubbish. Now you really are making it up. Go and have a look at
    a proper independent evaluator like Virus Bulletin and they'll tell a
    different story. Antivir has failed more often than it has succeeded
    (although, granted, they have been a little better over the last
    year). Conversely, Semantec haven't missed a virus since 1999.

    You pay for what you get.

    >I have done so for a number of years. None of my customer's have any
    >complaints. When they bring there machines back months later (spyware), I
    >will run a scan. No viruses.


    Not a very good idea, putting an inferior product on your customer's
    machines.

    >People are free to install Norton's. No skin off my nose, more work for me
    >later. But I do not see the point when other, free software does as well.


    Fact is, it doesn't. You are wrong.

    And in a corporate or server-based environment, you're a fool if you
    put anything else on there other than Symantec.

    >Oh, and take any criticism of the norton av and treble it for norton system
    >works.


    Ok, I agree on that one.
     
    H.O.G, Aug 20, 2005
    #12
  13. Squirrel

    Bling-Bling Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 20:21:34 +1200, Brendan wrote:

    >> On Micro$oft boxes all you need is to install the Zonealarm firewall. It
    >> is very good indeed.

    >
    > Squirrel, do not install zone alarm. It is trouble.
    >
    > There are plenty of other, better ones. For free.


    In what way is it trouble? I found it had worked very well indeed.


    Bling Bling

    --
    Fink: "The Linux market is growing 30% to 35% a year."
     
    Bling-Bling, Aug 20, 2005
    #13
  14. Squirrel

    Squirrel Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 20:21:34 +1200, Brendan <>
    wrote:

    >On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:20:48 +1200, Bling-Bling wrote:
    >
    >>> Forgot to say, might just flag the freebies and get the latest Norton
    >>> which has a good firewall I am told

    >>
    >> On Micro$oft boxes all you need is to install the Zonealarm firewall. It
    >> is very good indeed.

    >
    >Squirrel, do not install zone alarm. It is trouble.
    >
    >There are plenty of other, better ones. For free.



    NOW he tells me lol

    Squirrel
     
    Squirrel, Aug 20, 2005
    #14
  15. Squirrel

    Squirrel Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 21:59:58 +1200, Bling-Bling
    <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 20:21:34 +1200, Brendan wrote:
    >
    >>> On Micro$oft boxes all you need is to install the Zonealarm firewall. It
    >>> is very good indeed.

    >>
    >> Squirrel, do not install zone alarm. It is trouble.
    >>
    >> There are plenty of other, better ones. For free.

    >
    >In what way is it trouble? I found it had worked very well indeed.
    >
    >
    >Bling Bling


    So has my old man

    Squirrel
     
    Squirrel, Aug 20, 2005
    #15
  16. Squirrel

    Brendan Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 21:48:22 +1200, H.O.G wrote:

    >>Most of the PC's I repair have Norton's installed.

    >
    > Ever stop to think that maybe that's because they're by far the
    > largest antivirus software vendor?


    No. And that point is irrelevant anyway.

    They are on the machines because symantec pays the manufacturer to allow
    them to have their crippled version on it. It's advertising.

    >>1. All of them require 6 monthly fee's to be paid.

    >
    > I've yet to see one that requires 6 monthly fees. Are you sure you
    > know what you are talking about?


    The pre-installed ones often do.

    >>2. All of them have had viruses and trojans on them.

    >
    > Maybe that's why you have seen them? Ever thought that, if you work in
    > a PC workshop, you are going to see a large portion of machines with
    > viruses and other problems?


    Perhaps your stuttering out the obvious gets you some indulgence with other
    people. Maybe they reward your pseudo-intelligent drivel with a little
    attention sometimes.

    I'm not interested though.

    > Fact is, no antivirus software will give your machine total protection
    > from viruses. There is always a delay between when the virus is
    > released, and when the antivirus software's updates are available.
    > Symantec spends many millions of dollars a year ensuring that that
    > window is smaller than with any other solution.


    Any more obvious crap you want to get off your chest ? We could all do with
    another boring diatribe....

    >>Furthermore, I have run Norton's many different times myself. I have always
    >>been annoyed at the hoops you have to go to to getting it installed and up
    >>to date the first time, and it's general intrusive nature.

    >
    > It's not hard. You install it, then you run Live Update, and it
    > automatically updates itself. What's so tricky about that?


    When it fucks up.

    But that is not the point: I don't have those tens of megs of updates to
    download with anti vir.

    >Antivir has failed more often than it has succeeded
    > (although, granted, they have been a little better over the last
    > year).


    Yeah, about the time I've been using on client machines.

    >Conversely, Semantec haven't missed a virus since 1999.


    And yet I know it does.

    > You pay for what you get.


    And often you pay far more.

    >>I have done so for a number of years. None of my customer's have any
    >>complaints. When they bring there machines back months later (spyware), I
    >>will run a scan. No viruses.

    >
    > Not a very good idea, putting an inferior product on your customer's
    > machines.


    Not inferior.

    >>People are free to install Norton's. No skin off my nose, more work for me
    >>later. But I do not see the point when other, free software does as well.

    >
    > Fact is, it doesn't. You are wrong.


    You just said that for atleat a year, it has. It has matched norton's.

    > And in a corporate or server-based environment, you're a fool if you
    > put anything else on there other than Symantec.


    Don't do corporations.

    >>Oh, and take any criticism of the norton av and treble it for norton system
    >>works.

    >
    > Ok, I agree on that one.


    But you think the sun shines out of symantec.

    Look, I don't know what made you get soo snotty just because I have SEEN
    norton's av causing trouble. But I don't think you needed to go that way.

    --

    .... Brendan

    #330261 +(5927)- [X]

    <i8b4uUnderground> d-_-b
    <BonyNoMore> how u make that inverted b?
    <BonyNoMore> wait
    <BonyNoMore> never mind


    Note: All my comments are copyright 20/08/2005 10:03:56 p.m. and are opinion only where not otherwise stated and always "to the best of my recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
     
    Brendan, Aug 20, 2005
    #16
  17. Squirrel

    H.O.G Guest

    On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 01:16:55 +1200, Brendan <>
    spoke these fine words:

    >>Conversely, Semantec haven't missed a virus since 1999.

    >
    >And yet I know it does.


    Yes, of course. You just "know" more than every independent virus lab
    who consistently puts Symantec out on top.
    >
    >But you think the sun shines out of symantec.
    >

    Absolutely not. I just believe in using the best tool for the job. $2
    a week is hardly a reason to risk a virus infection by using an
    inferior product.

    >Look, I don't know what made you get soo snotty just because I have SEEN
    >norton's av causing trouble. But I don't think you needed to go that way.
    >

    I've seen Battlefield 2 causing trouble, but that doesn't mean I go
    around telling everyone it's crap.
     
    H.O.G, Aug 20, 2005
    #17
  18. Squirrel

    ~misfit~ Guest

    H.O.G wrote:
    > On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 01:16:55 +1200, Brendan <>
    > spoke these fine words:
    >
    >>> Conversely, Semantec haven't missed a virus since 1999.

    >>
    >> And yet I know it does.

    >
    > Yes, of course. You just "know" more than every independent virus lab
    > who consistently puts Symantec out on top.


    URLs please. You don't have to supply them for "every" independant lab.
    Just, say, 10 will do.
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Aug 21, 2005
    #18
  19. Squirrel

    H.O.G Guest

    On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 12:25:27 +1200, "~misfit~"
    <> spoke these fine words:

    >H.O.G wrote:
    >> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 01:16:55 +1200, Brendan <>
    >> spoke these fine words:
    >>
    >>>> Conversely, Semantec haven't missed a virus since 1999.
    >>>
    >>> And yet I know it does.

    >>
    >> Yes, of course. You just "know" more than every independent virus lab
    >> who consistently puts Symantec out on top.

    >
    >URLs please. You don't have to supply them for "every" independant lab.
    >Just, say, 10 will do.


    3 will do.

    www.virusbtn.com is regarded as *the* independent antivirus lab. Every
    couple of months they test a subset of products against viruses in the
    labs on a given platform, and record which products had a 100% success
    rate.

    Here's a summary of the most popular AV solutions, in order of
    success:

    Total S: Total Successes
    Total F: Total Failures (Followed by the percentage of success)
    Last F: The last time the product failed to achieve 100% success
    # of... : Self explanatory


    Norton AV
    Total S:28 F:6 - 82.4% success
    Last F: Sept 1999
    # of successes since last failure: 22


    CA eTrust AV
    Total S:20 F:11 - 64.5% success
    Last F: Nov 2004
    # of successes since last failure: 2


    Trend Micro PC-cillin
    Total S:12 F:7 - 63.2% success
    Last F: June 2002
    # of successes since last failure: 10


    McAfee
    Total S:20 F:18 - 52.6% success
    Last F: Feb 2005
    # of successes since last failure: 2


    AntiVir
    Total S:6 F:8 - 42.9% success
    Last F: Feb 2004
    # of successes since last failure: 6


    AVG
    Total S:9 F:20 - 31% success
    Last F: Feb 2004
    # of successes since last failure: 6


    AVG and AntiVir have failed more than they have passed. This is an
    independent eval, rather than someone just spouting on about how they
    "know" it fails more, which is actually a slanderous comment because
    it is based on fiction not fact.


    www.icsalabs.com tests a bunch of things, including the footprint
    (performance degredation) of different real-time engines. Again,
    Symantec fares well. It is usually not the best, but is there or there
    abouts, and combined with the level of success above, it makes it very
    difficult to justify recommending another solution.


    www.av-test.org generally detects the response time for AV vendors,
    between when a new threat is released, and when the vendor starts
    detecting it, and preventing it infecting a computer. Again, Symantec
    is almost always there or there abouts, and the likes of Antivir and
    AVG are almost always many hours, and in some cases days, behind. This
    is a very important measurement, as it measures the time your machine
    in vulnerable to new threats.


    Disclaimer: I do not work for, or have any involvement with any
    antivirus vendor. However, I have studied antivirus offerings in
    reasonable depth previously, including a rather large comparative
    review and report, taking many factors into consideration. We
    recommend antivirus solutions based on studied and accepted fact (the
    best tool for the job), rather than unsubstantiated opinion.
     
    H.O.G, Aug 21, 2005
    #19
  20. Squirrel

    daemon9 Guest

    On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 13:49:30 +1200, Brendan wrote:

    > On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:52:02 +1200, Squirrel wrote:
    >
    >>>You must have had one allready, XP?
    >>>

    >> Forgot to say, might just flag the freebies and get the latest Norton
    >> which has a good firewall I am told

    >
    > No it is not. Norton's has become bloated and buggy. It will slow your
    > computer down and cause you a lot of trouble. *snip*


    Seconded! I ditched Nortons off my Laptop a couple of months ago.

    d9
     
    daemon9, Aug 21, 2005
    #20
    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. Kouros

    Spread Firefox hacked?

    Kouros, Jul 15, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    501
    Travis Evans
    Jul 17, 2005
  2. fatah
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    4,317
    Phillip Remaker
    May 24, 2004
  3. =?Utf-8?B?R2Vvcmdl?=

    Host file hacked...

    =?Utf-8?B?R2Vvcmdl?=, Jan 19, 2004, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    993
  4. Rowdy Yates

    OT: April Fools - FARK Got Hacked.

    Rowdy Yates, Apr 1, 2004, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    439
    Rowdy Yates
    Apr 1, 2004
  5. Wayne McGlinn

    OT: Microsoft using Hacked software?

    Wayne McGlinn, Dec 7, 2004, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    480
Loading...

Share This Page