Inline Response:
Steve Dodson [MSFT]
MCSE, CISSP
PSS Security
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
Note: For the benefit of the community-at-large, all responses to this
message are best directed to the newsgroup/thread from which they
originated.
--------------------
>Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
>From: "Phony McRingRing" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>Sender: "Phony McRingRing" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>Subject: Couple AntiSpyware buglets
>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:14:03 -0800
>Lines: 23
>Message-ID: <07ed01c503c2$0da20d70$(E-Mail Removed)>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300
>Thread-Index: AcUDwg2izCdeFNDKS6a0URCA6PZC/g==
>Newsgroups: microsoft.private.security.spyware.announcements
>Path: cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl
>Xref: cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl
microsoft.private.security.spyware.announcements:1050
>NNTP-Posting-Host: tk2msftngxa12.phx.gbl 10.40.1.164
>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.private.security.spyware.announcements
>
>1) I have a hundred or so restricted sites defined. One
>or two of the registry-entries are detected as bad. We
>know the sites are bad; that's why they're restricted.
What does MWAS attempt to do with this registry key?
What does MWAS flag the reg keys as?
>
>2) I've had to disable hosts-file scanning, because
>largish files are not parsed properly. Entries detected
>as bad are displayed all munged-up like, instead of:
>
>ads.zedo.com 127.0.0.1 # (loopback)
>
>it will read it as something like
>
>o.com|127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1
>
>Other than these couple things:
>
Is this just the pop-up, or your actual host file.
>The software appears to get updated frequently (for now);
>is free (for now?? -- would never use if our enterprise
>had to pay extra). In sum it has the potential to be as
>good as other similar programs we are already using,
>particularly the very similar, very well-supported, free
>programs whose names we are loathe to mention lest they
>be squashed out of business (SB & SG).
>