Virus Warning

[Joe Bloggs]

Kaspersky Anti-Virus found a nasty in a file that may have been
recommended here (I can't remember where I heard of it).

The downloaded file was "setup_service_controller_XPv2.2.61.zip ",
which supposedly allowed user management of Windows services.
Kaspersky idenitified it as TrojanDropper.Win32.Small.gt.

 

[Vrodok the Troll]

Kaspersky Anti-Virus found a nasty in a file that may have been
recommended here (I can't remember where I heard of it).

The downloaded file was "setup_service_controller_XPv2.2.61.zip ",

In which group did you see this file?

 

[BarryTone]

Kaspersky Anti-Virus found a nasty in a file that may have been
recommended here (I can't remember where I heard of it).

The downloaded file was "setup_service_controller_XPv2.2.61.zip ",
which supposedly allowed user management of Windows services.
Kaspersky idenitified it as TrojanDropper.Win32.Small.gt.

You might have seen it mentioned in microsoft.public.windowsxp. The app
is called "Service Controller XP".

 

[Vrodok the Troll]

You might have seen it mentioned in microsoft.public.windowsxp.

"microsoft.public.windowsxp" is the root for several other groups. In which
"particular" group did you see it mentioned?

 

[BarryTone]

"microsoft.public.windowsxp" is the root for several other groups. In which
"particular" group did you see it mentioned?

Go to http://groups.google.com and put this in the search box (including
the quotes):
"service controller xp". You will get a list of all the particular groups.

Why is it *so* important that you know which exact group? Just curious.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

"microsoft.public.windowsxp" is the root for several other groups. In which
"particular" group did you see it mentioned?

I don't read any of those groups. If I didn't see it here then it
wasn't on Usenet. Or it may have been on the same site as something
mentioned here.

 

[Vrodok the Troll]

Go to http://groups.google.com and put this in the search box (including
the quotes):
"service controller xp". You will get a list of all the particular groups.

Why is it *so* important that you know which exact group? Just curious.

It is *so* important for the *simple* reason that I do *not* with to be "led
off on a (the proverbial) 'wild goose' chase". A certain nrews-group was
mentioned, but I find that-particular group does *not* exist (as named).

I'm sure you would not wish to grab "all new headers" within groups to which
you had never-before subscribed, then search thru all messages, in these new
groups. Guess what; neither would I. Would have, thereby, been quite nice if
the original poster had extended this same courtesy to everyone else, as he had
to *himself*.

 

[BarryTone]

I'm sure you would not wish to grab "all new headers" within groups to which
you had never-before subscribed, then search thru all messages, in these new
groups. Guess what; neither would I. Would have, thereby, been quite nice if
the original poster had extended this same courtesy to everyone else, as he had
to *himself*.

Sounds like a lot of unnecessary work to me. Geez, you had the name of
the program, all you had to do was use the web. As I said, use
groups.google.com. Remember, google is your friend...

 

[BarryTone]

It is *so* important for the *simple* reason that I do *not* with to be "led
off on a (the proverbial) 'wild goose' chase". A certain nrews-group was
mentioned, but I find that-particular group does *not* exist (as named).

Let me say one more thing, all I did was ask if it *might* have been in
a group such as "microsoft.public.windowsxp". If you perform the actual
search as I suggested, you would see about 5 different groups and most
of them have to do with windows xp. So, I did not want to get specific
on purpose. Enough.

 

[Mr. F says \Hi\]

Sounds like a lot of unnecessary work to me. Geez, you had the name of
the program, all you had to do was use the web. As I said, use
groups.google.com. Remember, google is your friend...

Lololol. Gotta remember this is a *self-confessed* ***Troll*** so he
obviously *wants* to **misread** your post and complain about *fictitious*
and *spurious* **problems**.

I love trolls. Do you think he's got fluorescent hair?

Ain't Google Advanced Groups Search just great, eh? - if only people knew
how to use it properly. What a wasted resource

Here you go Vrodok,
http://www.google.co.uk/advanced_group_search
)

..... still chuckling ...

 

[BarryTone]

Lololol. Gotta remember this is a *self-confessed* ***Troll*** so he
obviously *wants* to **misread** your post and complain about *fictitious*
and *spurious* **problems**.

Yeah, I know he's a troll, but he tries to sound so serious. It's
actually kind of fun...

 

[Vrodok the Troll]

Sounds like a lot of unnecessary work to me. Geez, you had the name of
the program, all you had to do was use the web.

You intimated a file, posted *somewhere* in the newsgroups, was infected. When
pressed for the "location" of said file, you lied, covered your a**, then tried
to dispose of the situation.

In my humble opinion, you are nothing more than a "bait & switch 'artist'",
a.k.a. a "common BS-er".

[- FLUSH -]

 

[BarryTone]

In my humble opinion, you are nothing more than a "bait & switch 'artist'",
a.k.a. a "common BS-er".

Cool! Now go **** yourself.

 

[omega]

Pretty strange tangent there.

Cool! Now go **** yourself.

It might have been one of those cases of therapeutic redirection. (When
pissed off at one's boss, or cow-orkers, or family, etc, to redirect that
frustration into an arena safe from serious repercussion, unleashing on
a random anon target.)

 

[BarryTone]

It might have been one of those cases of therapeutic redirection. (When
pissed off at one's boss, or cow-orkers, or family, etc, to redirect that
frustration into an arena safe from serious repercussion, unleashing on
a random anon target.)

Or, just possibly, a way to say "get lost".

 

[omega]

It might have been one of those cases of therapeutic redirection. [...]

Or, just possibly, a way to say "get lost".

My posting was kind of unclear, sorry. I wasn't referring at all to
your comment (where you ended the thing with a "Bye, fine, **** off.")
I was referring to the whole aggressive tangent that Vrodok took up.
It made no sense that the ostensible point of quarrel (the newsgroup
name thingy) could have really mattered. Thus the redirection theory;
(filed under "humans are not logical creatures.")

 

[BarryTone]

I was referring to the whole aggressive tangent that Vrodok took up.
It made no sense that the ostensible point of quarrel (the newsgroup
name thingy) could have really mattered. Thus the redirection theory;
(filed under "humans are not logical creatures.")

Yep. It appears that they become more aggressive when confronted with
clear logic.

They are a lot like terrorists, in that they thrive on the confusion factor.

What I find interesting, is you now see *multiple trolls* assuming the
same identity. This gives the additional false appearance of a
complicated personality at work.

Personally, they are like spammers to me. Total scum.

 

[omega]

What I find interesting, is you now see *multiple trolls* assuming the
same identity. This gives the additional false appearance of a
complicated personality at work.

One of the weirdest trools I've ever paid attention to, named "the
Entity," it did that weird mix. There were two people, sharing posting
for a pair of primary personas. Then one of those two people used about
four additional minor personas. Then one of those minor personas, it was
such a compelling character (an "evil church lady"), that there became an
unclear number of other people who posted using its identity. It was all
very confusing, of course. And strange. The main redeeming factor was that
the Entity spent most of its energies within a newsgroup dedicated to
supporting those sorts of pastimes...

 

[Vrodok the Troll]

Pretty strange tangent there.

Someone-or-other states, in this group, that a certain file is infected.
However, when (initially) asked for the "where-abouts" of this file, the
original poster not only failed to "point in the general direction", but
appears to "beg out" & seemed to infer of [a] file-abscence. If there
was no ("infected") file then why say so in the first place?

Although I did not say so earlier (one is left wondering if the original-poster
has simple comprehension of such things), I do very-much like
"discombooberating" files which are suspect, to find out what makes them
"tick". The "bait & switch 'artist'" comment refered to one (orig'l poster) who
gets-up someone's hopes, then suddenly mentions non-availability.

Not a strange tangent (imho; ymmv) at all.

 

[Vrodok the Troll]

It might have been one of those cases of therapeutic redirection. [...]

Or, just possibly, a way to say "get lost".

My posting was kind of unclear, sorry. I wasn't referring at all to
your comment (where you ended the thing with a "Bye, fine, **** off.")
I was referring to the whole aggressive tangent that Vrodok took up.

See my reply to your other post, please.