TT Livescan - Major Revision Coming Soon

[idbeholda]

Within the next few weeks, the databases will be overhauled, as I now
have the resources to make the private build of TT Livescan public.
There will also be several new databases, which will increase the
chances of finding new malware. All of the database formats will
converted accordingly. This still means the user will have to have an
internet connection of some kind in order to use TT Livescan. The
reason for this is quite easy... I don't imagine a user base that's
eager to install data in excess of 200GB per machine.

Users will also have a new feature to look forward to: Quicker
scantimes. And by quicker, I don't mean a few seconds here and there,
but rather halves to a quarter of the time it takes now. So far, the
tests are coming along nicely, and even over a dialup connection, an
entire system scan takes about 5-6 minutes to perform, with no extra
overhead to the system itself. This is not wishful thinking, but a
reality. I believe this will prove to be a major step towards setting
a new kind of standard for the entire anti-malware industry as a
whole, and not just as a benefit to the consumer.

If you are interested in contributing to this project, I can be
contacted at (e-mail address removed) or (e-mail address removed)

Thank you for your patience and support.

http://www.tot-ltd.org

 

[StevieO]

Asked and answered many times before.

Move along and plan another fake funeral



My understanding is that if a computer is already infected when an
attempt is made to install an anti-virus programme, it is possible for
the malware to protect itself during the installation process, leaving
the computer user believing that their client is protected - but it isn't!

Is that right or wrong?

 

[David H. Lipman]

From: "~BD~" <[email protected]>


| My understanding is that if a computer is already infected when an
| attempt is made to install an anti-virus programme, it is possible for
| the malware to protect itself during the installation process, leaving
| the computer user believing that their client is protected - but it isn't!

| Is that right or wrong?

Wrong!

If a given anti malware solution is known to the malicious software then the anti malware
product won't install or will be corrupted. The end-user would know.

Idbeholda's software is NOT well known so the chances of this are slim to none.

Stop trolling. If this was a question, then you should have posted the query directly not
replying to Idbeholda's announcement. Since you replied to Idbeholda's announcement, you
are trolling him and your actions continue to place you in the troll category.

 

[Peter Foldes]

BD

You are one sick MF lying Troll. Why in the world did you do that to MalwareBytes
today ( yet you use it ) and advise the OP to see the blog of PCButts (and you also
posted the link to his blog ) why MalwareBytes is not to be trusted and no good. Go
and shrivel away. Everyone will be better off



--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

 

[Dustin]

BD

You are one sick MF lying Troll. Why in the world did you do that to
MalwareBytes today ( yet you use it ) and advise the OP to see the
blog of PCButts (and you also posted the link to his blog ) why
MalwareBytes is not to be trusted and no good. Go and shrivel away.
Everyone will be better off

Mind telling me what your going off about?

 

[Peter Foldes]

Dustin

An Op asked if MalwareBytes is OK to install

BD's answer is the following to the OP today in the
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general

Something to think about here:-

http://pcbutts1-therealtruth.blogspot.com/

HTH

--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

 

[FromTheRafters]

Dustin

An Op asked if MalwareBytes is OK to install

BD's answer is the following to the OP today in the
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general

Thanks Peter.

http://www.pcreview.co.uk/forums/thread-4027936.php

 

[FromTheRafters]

Dustin

An Op asked if MalwareBytes is OK to install

BD's answer is the following to the OP today in the
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general

Here's the Google archived thread:

http://groups.google.com/group/micr...eneral/browse_thread/thread/3552638c1d53aae2#

 

[FromTheRafters]

Dustin

An Op asked if MalwareBytes is OK to install

BD's answer is the following to the OP today in the
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general

Here's the Google archived post w/headers:

http://groups.google.com/group/micr...eneral/browse_thread/thread/3552638c1d53aae2#

 

[FromTheRafters]

Dustin

An Op asked if MalwareBytes is OK to install

BD's answer is the following to the OP today in the
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/msg/81542db85149567a?dmode=source

 

[Dustin]

Dustin

An Op asked if MalwareBytes is OK to install

BD's answer is the following to the OP today in the
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general

Thanks, I've visited the thread.. No further need to derail this one.

 

[idbeholda]

I was aiming for the next major release at the end of november, but
there may be a week delay in this. There are still a few minor
database glitches on my end (not the hosting provider) that still
needs tended to after the first upload of the database is complete.
December 5th is when the new incarnation of TT Livescan should be
available to the public.

If you have any questions, or would like to participate in some way,
feel free to contact me.