"Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free."

"AVG ****s up again!"

"Muuuuaaaaahhhaaaaaaahhhhuuuuuhhhhhaaaaaaa!"


> Test =)
> wsahkrettos
> --
> Test, yep.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.563 / Virus Database: 355 - Release Date: 1/17/2004
>
>
>
> __________ NOD32 1.601 (20040118) Notification __________
>
> Warning: NOD32 antivirus system found the following infiltrations in the message:
> kcrpwsbyild.exe.safe - Win32/Bagle.A worm
>
> http://www.nod32.com
>
>
-=-
This message was posted via two or more anonymous remailing services.

Its a new worm! a massmailer!


Stephen

"Anonymous" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:XB9TP28P38005.2425925926@anonymous...
>
> "Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free."
>
> "AVG ****s up again!"
>
> "Muuuuaaaaahhhaaaaaaahhhhuuuuuhhhhhaaaaaaa!"
>
>
> > Test =)
> > wsahkrettos
> > --
> > Test, yep.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.563 / Virus Database: 355 - Release Date: 1/17/2004
> >
> >
> >
> > __________ NOD32 1.601 (20040118) Notification __________
> >
> > Warning: NOD32 antivirus system found the following infiltrations in the
message:
> > kcrpwsbyild.exe.safe - Win32/Bagle.A worm
> >
> > http://www.nod32.com
> >
> >
> -=-
> This message was posted via two or more anonymous remailing services.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

The voice of "Anonymous" drifted in on the cyber-winds,
from the sea of virtual chaos...

> "Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free."
>
> "AVG ****s up again!"
>
> "Muuuuaaaaahhhaaaaaaahhhhuuuuuhhhhhaaaaaaa!"


Give them time to update... It's only been what, three days since it
was first found in the wild, and todays virus update catches it. Hell
the media just started talking about it today as well!

We've had this talk before. AVG 6.x still uses old-school methods of
virus detection. This is not only less processor intensive, but less
prone to false hits. True, it's not as afective at detecting new
threats, but it's bang-on acurate once a virus is defined.

You have to "run" the attachement in I-Worm/Bagle in order for it to
infect a system, even under OE. So it's not just a matter of detection
issue, but one of user stupity.

--
Maxwell C.G. Pollare, a "small god" in his own mind...

Maxx Pollare wrote:

> The voice of "Anonymous" drifted in on the cyber-winds,
> from the sea of virtual chaos...
>
>
>>"Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free."
>>
>>"AVG ****s up again!"
>>
>>"Muuuuaaaaahhhaaaaaaahhhhuuuuuhhhhhaaaaaaa!"
>
> Give them time to update...

you mean give them time to make the certification appear true again...

it's not that avg missed a virus, it's that it issued a false
certification...

--
"hungry people don't stay hungry for long
they get hope from fire and smoke as the weak grow strong
hungry people don't stay hungry for long
they get hope from fire and smoke as they reach for the dawn"

"kurt wismer" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:fl_Ob.7240$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Maxx Pollare wrote:
>
> > The voice of "Anonymous" drifted in on the cyber-winds,
> > from the sea of virtual chaos...
> >
> >
> >>"Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free."
> >>
> >>"AVG ****s up again!"
> >>
> >>"Muuuuaaaaahhhaaaaaaahhhhuuuuuhhhhhaaaaaaa!"
> >
> > Give them time to update...
>
> you mean give them time to make the certification appear true again...
>
> it's not that avg missed a virus, it's that it issued a false
> certification...

Does AVG indeed apply the certification to the worm ridden e-mail?
If so, can they be liable for damages when someone takes them at
their word and executes the attachment?

The voice of "FromTheRafters" drifted in on the cyber-winds,
from the sea of virtual chaos...

>> you mean give them time to make the certification appear true
>> again...
>>
>> it's not that avg missed a virus, it's that it issued a false
>> certification...
>
> Does AVG indeed apply the certification to the worm ridden e-mail?
> If so, can they be liable for damages when someone takes them at
> their word and executes the attachment?


It missed the "certification" because it missed the virus. Not that it
matters, it's ultimately just advertising. The point is some idiot had
to open that virus attachment to get infected, someone who put too much
trust in his AV software.

That idiot could've been using any other AV software and last weeks
defs and got away with it Scott-free. But since he's using AVG with a
default install, and some other **** disturber got an email from him,
we're now scamming it up on just how bad AVG is compared to the
competition.

The score:
The Infected... B- At least he's trying...
The Anon poster... D Lame attack and blatant AV advert.
Myself... C I should know better

--
Maxwell C.G. Pollare, a "small god" in his own mind...

"Maxx Pollare" <spamnet-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> The voice of "FromTheRafters" drifted in on the cyber-winds,
> from the sea of virtual chaos...
>
> >
> > Does AVG indeed apply the certification to the worm ridden e-mail?
> > If so, can they be liable for damages when someone takes them at
> > their word and executes the attachment?
>
>
> It missed the "certification" because it missed the virus. Not that it
> matters, it's ultimately just advertising. The point is some idiot had
> to open that virus attachment to get infected, someone who put too much
> trust in his AV software.
>
> That idiot could've been using any other AV software and last weeks
> defs and got away with it Scott-free. But since he's using AVG with a
> default install, and some other **** disturber got an email from him,
> we're now scamming it up on just how bad AVG is compared to the
> competition.
>
> The score:
> The Infected... B- At least he's trying...
> The Anon poster... D Lame attack and blatant AV advert.
> Myself... C I should know better
>
> --
> Maxwell C.G. Pollare, a "small god" in his own mind...

Yeah, I agree here, and maybe AVG should re-think their auto-certification.
However the bottom line is that every net-user is going to have to face up
to the fact that they are ultimately responsible for their own security. But
considering AVG is free for personal use (and I've used it with no
complaints for the past 2 years since defecting from Norton), you need to
cut them some slack. The certification is a recipe for "egg-in-one's-face"
and maybe after the latest embarrassment they'll re-consider...

KS

keith wrote:
[snip]
> Yeah, I agree here, and maybe AVG should re-think their auto-certification.
> However the bottom line is that every net-user is going to have to face up
> to the fact that they are ultimately responsible for their own security. But
> considering AVG is free for personal use (and I've used it with no
> complaints for the past 2 years since defecting from Norton), you need to
> cut them some slack. The certification is a recipe for "egg-in-one's-face"
> and maybe after the latest embarrassment they'll re-consider...

maybe if more people recognized it as the intellectual dishonesty that
it is and held them accountable for their snake-oil salesmanship they'd
reconsider...

--
"hungry people don't stay hungry for long
they get hope from fire and smoke as the weak grow strong
hungry people don't stay hungry for long
they get hope from fire and smoke as they reach for the dawn"

"Maxx Pollare" <spamnet-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

> It missed the "certification" because it missed the virus. Not that it
> matters, it's ultimately just advertising.

I'd say it's more than just advertising. See example below:

Outgoing mail is
certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG
anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.562 /
Virus Database: 354 - Release Date: 16/01/20

The point is some idiot had
> to open that virus attachment to get infected, someone who put too much
> trust in his AV software.

Right. And that's just what the vendor expects folks to do. To get back to
Rafters' point, this sort of comes off like a commitment by Grisoft to virus
free messaging, using their product. Maybe over in Eastern Europe or China
that sort of thing is looked at as "just advertising". You know, where
access to resources is stunningly competitive, ethics are in short supply.

>
> That idiot could've been using any other AV software and last weeks
> defs and got away with it Scott-free. But since he's using AVG with a
> default install, and some other **** disturber got an email from him,
> we're now scamming it up on just how bad AVG is compared to the
> competition.
>
AVG is an easy target, that's all. They make themselves such.

"Maxx Pollare" <spamnet-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> The voice of "FromTheRafters" drifted in on the cyber-winds,
> from the sea of virtual chaos...
>
> >> you mean give them time to make the certification appear true
> >> again...
> >>
> >> it's not that avg missed a virus, it's that it issued a false
> >> certification...
> >
> > Does AVG indeed apply the certification to the worm ridden e-mail?
> > If so, can they be liable for damages when someone takes them at
> > their word and executes the attachment?
>
>
> It missed the "certification" because it missed the virus. Not that it
> matters, it's ultimately just advertising. The point is some idiot had
> to open that virus attachment to get infected, someone who put too much
> trust in his AV software.

Some people might trust the "certification" more than it deserves. It
should just say that it looked and didn't find anything instead of this
"certified virus free" bullshit. Most of us know better than to expect
even the best anti-virus program to be able to tell us a file is benign.

> That idiot could've been using any other AV software and last weeks
> defs and got away with it Scott-free.

They all pretty much suck at magic tricks.

> But since he's using AVG with a
> default install, and some other **** disturber got an email from him,
> we're now scamming it up on just how bad AVG is compared to the
> competition.

I kind of like AVG and am glad that there are free AV tools available.
Many people don't want to spend any money on AV, and that hurts
everyone else when they get infested with mass-mailers.

I don't like the advertisement at the end of outgoing messages,
although I can see why they would want to do this.

....but they can stuff their "certification" where the sun don't shine.