Re: PING splatter [was: Re: Can a hacker]

From: Splatter (me@me.net)
Date: 03/27/02

  • Next message: chris@nospam.com: "Re: How to make Windows require two passwords for the Administrator?" 

    From: "Splatter" <me@me.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 08:49:36 -0500

    Hey all,
     I checked into. Downloaded a copy and made the corrections. Re-loaded it up
    to a server so It wasn't on the local machine and yes it worked. The
    registry work around fixed it.
    Thanks Dave, and everyone for drawing my attention to that error. Didn't
    even think to look to see if the code pointed to the right object. 

    --
HTH

    D.P.

    "Beer, the cause of, and solution too,
 all of life's problems"
Homer Simpson

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.170639ac186cba749897df@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <Xns91D98CFACEB35juergennieveler@nieveler-
> 43544.user.cis.dfn.de>, juergen.nieveler@web.de says...
> > Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> > > McAfee corporate edition doesn't catch it at all!
> >
> > Mine does... calls it Exploit.CodeBase
> >
> > Version 4.5.1 SP1, with Datfiles 4.0.4192 and Engine 4.1.60
>
> I should have said that McAfee didn't catch it when it came out, but NAV
> did, and the personal version of NAV 2002 stopped it dead. The Corp NAV
> alerted me, but let it run, and the McAfee didn't see anything - and let
> it run.
>
> Within several days, the Corp. version of McAfee stopped it, and so did
> the Corp. version of NAV.
>
> I've always liked NAV better than McAfee - I run a shop that's split
> between them and NAV always does better. (Not trying to start a flame
> war, it's just that I have both NAV and McAfee in our shop and that's
> what I see).
>
>
> --
> --
> Leythos999@columbus.rr.com
> (Remove 999 to reply to me)

    Relevant Pages

    • [Full-Disclosure] Hi! Antiviruses Comparison - A Little Research Results
      ... Size-wise number one and two players McAfee and NAV are US ... NAV are huge, but not so strong outside the USA and it's colonies. ... NAV management is very hard to set ... Some central management solutions simply suck or do not ...
      (Full-Disclosure)
    • Re: NAV vs. McAfee
      ... >Firewall Plus and their protection is great and pretty comprehensive ... >through McAfee Help Forums ... >>I just had an awful experience getting my NAV subscriptions renewed on ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
    • Re: NAV vs. McAfee
      ... Firewall Plus and their protection is great and pretty comprehensive and, ... Technical Service Representative or paid phone support or through McAfee ... >I just had an awful experience getting my NAV subscriptions renewed on two ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
    • RE: Anti-Virus Software - Need Recommendations
      ... Definatly go with McAfee, I am the head of I.T. at my company and I have tried both NAV and McAfee and by far McAfee is far better and easier to work with. ... > I'd be happy to hear more about others' experience with Grisoft. ... the laptop came with XP Home edition; ...
      (microsoft.public.win2000.security)
    • Re: McAfee Internet Security 5 causing slow clock - anyone else having problems?
      ... Cheryl Fischer wrote: ... > did not even think of a connection to McAfee until your post. ... > separately), I have experienced no problems of any sort with NAV 2003, ... Installed IS5 and didn't notice anything ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)