Ping IT guys - XP 100% CPU question

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by ~misfit~, Dec 13, 2013.

  1. ~misfit~

    Enkidu Guest

    The heuristics mean that modern antivirus programs can detect a threat
    even if there is no specific rule for the threat.

    Where did you get your 80% figure from? If you have software that only
    catches 1 in 5 threats you need to change your software. Here's some
    *real* data : http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php . Most get
    well over 90%. Interestingly, out of the box Windows 7 stops 91.9%.

    I'm surprised that the figures were so low. I'd expect over 99%. As it
    is the numbers are much higher than 2009.

    Cheers,

    Cliff
     
    Enkidu, Dec 18, 2013
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. ~misfit~

    victor Guest

    Prove it.

    http://www.av-test.org/no_cache/en/tests/test-reports/?tx_avtestreports_pi1[report_no]=130597
     
    victor, Dec 18, 2013
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Only if that new threat follows similar "rules" to previous ones. :-\

    The maker's of Avast have been jumping up and down with excitment this
    week because the new version supposedl has "improved detection" ...
    which proves the point that it (and all other anti-malware
    applications) can not even remotely find and stop ALL malware.
     
    Your Name, Dec 19, 2013
    #43
  4. ~misfit~

    victor Guest

    Its a matter of whether that hypothetical fraction of malware which is
    is undefined and not filtered out by heuristic methods can propagate itself.

    As you said any PCs including macs apple android ios whatever are only
    100% safe as long as you don't connect them to anything.
    Its a percentage game, what are the chances that malware that they don't
    know about that exploits vulnerabilities that they haven't found will
    make its way to your PC ?

    MSE seems perfectly adequate, but Avast is supposed to be a good one
    according to AV-TEST.
     
    victor, Dec 19, 2013
    #44
  5. ~misfit~

    Enkidu Guest

    They can detect and remove all known threats and stop most of the newer
    as yet unrecorded malware and viruses. I suspect that only one in a
    thousand gets through. If you are repeatedly getting infected and it is
    apparent to you that you are getting infected, then you are doing
    something wrong. If 20% (1 in 5) of viruses get through your
    malware/virus protection then you should change it something much more
    effective.

    Cheers,

    Cliff
     
    Enkidu, Dec 19, 2013
    #45
  6. ~misfit~

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Fair enough if they're paying for a service. Not so good if they're
    expecting free support and refuse to learn even the most basic things. I no
    longer help him with his computer because of his attitude - I don't even
    want to know about it.
    --
    /Shaun.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
    cozy little classification in the DSM."
    David Melville (in r.a.s.f1).
    [Sent from my OrbitalT ocular implant interface]
     
    ~misfit~, Dec 19, 2013
    #46
  7. ~misfit~

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Thanks for the input Cliff. :)
    --
    /Shaun.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
    cozy little classification in the DSM."
    David Melville (in r.a.s.f1).
    [Sent from my OrbitalT ocular implant interface]
     
    ~misfit~, Dec 19, 2013
    #47
  8. ~misfit~

    ~misfit~ Guest

    So your mother's using Linux now?
    --
    /Shaun.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
    cozy little classification in the DSM."
    David Melville (in r.a.s.f1).
    [Sent from my OrbitalT ocular implant interface]
     
    ~misfit~, Dec 19, 2013
    #48
  9. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Yep, doing something wrong ... like using Windoze. ;-)
    Thankfully nobody I know with a micromilligram of intelligence still
    uses the rubbish.


    As I said before, we did change it. I tried the original Norton, then
    the free Avast and AVG, amoung other more specific anit-malware
    applications. Still none of them stopped everything.
     
    Your Name, Dec 19, 2013
    #49
  10. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Pity it's the same thing I said days ago. :-\
     
    Your Name, Dec 19, 2013
    #50
  11. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    <snip>

    That's not what I said.

    I said your Windoze PC is only safe if you leave it in the box, but
    yes, it is a similar (although nowhere near as bad) situation with
    Android.

    There is no real malware for the Mac or iOS. There are a few bits of
    malware claimed to exist (by the people selling anit-malware
    applications of course), but nothing that any normal user has ever had
    or will ever get. If you stupidly "jailbreak" your iOS device, install
    pirate software, etc., then you simply get what you ask for.
     
    Your Name, Dec 19, 2013
    #51
  12. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Yep, Avast is so good that with the latest version they even managed to
    "improve detection" above the supposed "99.999%" that someone here
    claimed anti-malware applications already do. :-\
     
    Your Name, Dec 19, 2013
    #52
  13. ~misfit~

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Not in the same way you didn't. Anyway Cliff says it in a more positive way.
    --
    /Shaun.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
    cozy little classification in the DSM."
    David Melville (in r.a.s.f1).
    [Sent from my OrbitalT ocular implant interface]
     
    ~misfit~, Dec 19, 2013
    #53
  14. ~misfit~

    Enkidu Guest

    Windows is not the issue. Good virus programs and anti-malware is. Bad
    practices is.

    Plenty of people use Windows and only a small percentage, including you,
    appparently, keep getting infected because of bad practises.
    I used free AVG and it was fine. I didn't have an infection while using
    it. Similarly with Avast. However I stripped out all those and now use
    the Microsoft Security Essentials on all the Windows machines that I've
    been asked to secure. It's robust and effective.

    My own machine runs Ubuntu, but mainly because I like Linux, and not
    really for security reasons.

    Cheers,

    Cliff
     
    Enkidu, Dec 20, 2013
    #54
  15. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    You're missing the point - absolutely none of the Windows anti-malware
    applications can nor will stop 100% of malware (or even 99.999%). It's
    a factual impossibility, even without the added problems of malware
    that actively disables the anti-malware application so it won't be
    noticed.

    The anti-maleware makers are ALWAYS behind the malware makers (unless
    you subscribe to the theory that the anti-malware companies actually
    make the malware to create sales), and no amount of "pattern matching"
    will ever find all malware. The hackers simply use a new and different
    pattern or technique.



    I never said they didn't stop anything at all, simply that they don't
    stop everything. Plus you're assuming there was no infection simply
    because they never reported one ... which is not the same as there not
    being one. Despite the big green light or smiley face that the
    anti-malware application displays, it's possible, if not extremely
    likely, that the computer did have some malware that was simply not
    detected.


    Even leaving the Windows computer in its box is not be a guarantee of
    it not being infected. Some computers have actually been infected at
    the factory!
     
    Your Name, Dec 20, 2013
    #55
  16. ~misfit~

    Enkidu Guest

    That's an old problem and pretty much been solved by anti-virus software
    makers.
    That's where the heuristics come in. However, it doesn't what patterns
    the virus makers use, the anti virus software they can be easily
    spotted, and it is rare these days for a totally new technique to be
    developed by the virus makers.
    An 'infection' which doesn't do anything and can't be detected is hardly
    a real infection, and the 'viruses' and 'infections' that virus software
    detects these days is almost all 'webbugs'. Look at your antivirus logs
    sometime.

    Cheers,

    Cliff
     
    Enkidu, Dec 20, 2013
    #56
  17. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Yep, and that's a flock of avian-capabel porcines going past your 8th
    story external viewing portal. :-\

    If someone can make something, someone else can break it, given enough
    time and desire to do so.



    The "heuristics" basically IS pattern matching. All the hackers need to
    do is use a different technique ... and that's exactly what they do,
    otherwise there would be nor more malware at all.

    Yet again, absolutely NO anti-malware application on the planet can nor
    will ever stop ALL malware. It's a factual impossibility.



    I never said it didn't do anything. I simply said the anti-malware
    didn't detect, stop, nor remove it.


    I don't have any - I'm intelligent and use a Mac rather than silly
    Windoze. Not that looking at "antivirus logs" wil prove anything
    anyway, since if the anti-malware application hasn't seen the malware,
    it obviously won't be in any logs either. :-\
     
    Your Name, Dec 20, 2013
    #57
  18. ~misfit~

    victor Guest

    I can't see a problem with that.
    Its good and the new version is better.
     
    victor, Dec 21, 2013
    #58
  19. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Yes, but being better than the supposed "99.999%" detection rate
    someone else claimed anti-malware applications already had is pretty
    near impossible.
     
    Your Name, Dec 21, 2013
    #59
  20. ~misfit~

    victor Guest

    Then you were being dishonest
     
    victor, Dec 21, 2013
    #60
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.