PDA

View Full Version : Any problems with AVG8?



Gualtier Malde
05-15-08, 06:56 PM
I am running Windows 2000 SP 4 and have AVG 7.5 installed. I recently renewed
my subscription and now AVG is urging download and installation of v 8. I am
writing because I think I recall someone describing some trouble with v 8, but I
can't find the reference.

So: Anyone having trouble with v 8 in this environment?

Thanks

Nokternl
05-20-08, 11:59 PM
On May 15, 6:56*pm, Gualtier Malde <valac...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am running Windows 2000 SP 4 and have AVG 7.5 installed. *I recently renewed
> my subscription and now AVG is urging download and installation of v 8. *I am
> writing because I think I recall someone describing some trouble with v 8,but I
> can't find the reference.
>
> So: Anyone having trouble with v 8 in this environment?
>
> Thanks

In my office, we have had both good and bad luck, but we've only
installed AVG8 on a handful of Win2k machines. Only one installation
has failed and we weren't exactly sure why this happened. Provided
that memory serves me correctly, i believe it was because SP4 wasn't
installed first, but unfortunately I cannot remember for sure since it
was a while ago. I just wanted to let you know that our office had
trouble with an installation. One thing I do remember as part of one
of the AVG8 upgrade was that there is a Roxio patch that was required
to be installed before AVG8. If believe the installer had the link to
download the update when the error occurred, so you might want to take
that into account if you have it. I hope this helps you on your road
to an answer.

Gualtier Malde
05-23-08, 04:05 PM
Nokternl wrote:
> On May 15, 6:56 pm, Gualtier Malde <valac...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I am running Windows 2000 SP 4 and have AVG 7.5 installed. I recently renewed
>> my subscription and now AVG is urging download and installation of v 8. I am
>> writing because I think I recall someone describing some trouble with v 8, but I
>> can't find the reference.
>>
>> So: Anyone having trouble with v 8 in this environment?
>>
>> Thanks
>
> In my office, we have had both good and bad luck, but we've only
> installed AVG8 on a handful of Win2k machines. Only one installation
> has failed and we weren't exactly sure why this happened. Provided
> that memory serves me correctly, i believe it was because SP4 wasn't
> installed first, but unfortunately I cannot remember for sure since it
> was a while ago. I just wanted to let you know that our office had
> trouble with an installation. One thing I do remember as part of one
> of the AVG8 upgrade was that there is a Roxio patch that was required
> to be installed before AVG8. If believe the installer had the link to
> download the update when the error occurred, so you might want to take
> that into account if you have it. I hope this helps you on your road
> to an answer

Thanks - I just got back here. Meanwhile I did install v 8 and it seems OK. I
don't recall a Roxio component, but Roxio is insinuated in so much software
these days that nothing surprises me about it.

Jim Watt
05-27-08, 01:57 PM
On Thu, 15 May 2008 16:56:39 -0700, Gualtier Malde
<valacapt@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I am running Windows 2000 SP 4 and have AVG 7.5 installed. I recently renewed
>my subscription and now AVG is urging download and installation of v 8. I am
>writing because I think I recall someone describing some trouble with v 8, but I
>can't find the reference.
>
>So: Anyone having trouble with v 8 in this environment?
>
>Thanks

I dislike the feature where it checks website pages for
problems, as it means that if you open a google search
page, it visits all the links.

However it can be turned off, although the tray icon
admonishes you for it with a little red exclamation.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Beachcomber
05-28-08, 11:19 AM
>I dislike the feature where it checks website pages for
>problems, as it means that if you open a google search
>page, it visits all the links.
>
>However it can be turned off, although the tray icon
>admonishes you for it with a little red exclamation.
>--
>Jim Watt
>http://www.gibnet.com

My PC is about 4 years old and I just installed the free version of
AVG 8.

I'm very displeased with the speed reduction. Whatever new features
there are seem to have slowed down the browser to the point where it
is not usable. Browser pages take longer to load and e-mail was
noticably slower as well.

I had to disable the autoload of AVG from the system tray because I
just couldn't stand it anymore. I'm one of those who had used the
previous freeware version of AVG for years without any problems.

This new version seems to have a stanglehold over system resources
unless perhaps, your computer is one of the newest and fastest models
or perhaps the PAY version works better.

Anyone know for sure? Anyone else see the slowdown?

Beachcomber

Sebastian G.
05-28-08, 11:37 AM
Beachcomber wrote:


> I'm very displeased with the speed reduction. Whatever new features
> there are seem to have slowed down the browser to the point where it
> is not usable. Browser pages take longer to load and e-mail was
> noticably slower as well.


Maybe you should disable the web and mail scanning proxy? As any competent
person would do?

jc
05-28-08, 11:59 AM
Jim Watt wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 16:56:39 -0700, Gualtier Malde
> <valacapt@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I am running Windows 2000 SP 4 and have AVG 7.5 installed. I recently renewed
>> my subscription and now AVG is urging download and installation of v 8. I am
>> writing because I think I recall someone describing some trouble with v 8, but I
>> can't find the reference.
>>
>> So: Anyone having trouble with v 8 in this environment?
>>
>> Thanks
>
> I dislike the feature where it checks website pages for
> problems, as it means that if you open a google search
> page, it visits all the links.
>

That's an interesting idea. Probably not as effective as safe surfing
and blocking scripts, but maybe with a whitelist it could be feasible.


jc

> However it can be turned off, although the tray icon
> admonishes you for it with a little red exclamation.
> --
> Jim Watt
> http://www.gibnet.com

David James
05-28-08, 12:48 PM
I'm having issues on my windoze box with it scanning emails and crashing,
but I only use it as a back up.

jc
05-28-08, 08:41 PM
David James wrote:
> I'm having issues on my windoze box with it scanning emails and crashing,
> but I only use it as a back up.

It sounds like they got ambitious but also got hit by a deadline. You
might wait for 8.1 to be released.


jc

Gualtier Malde
05-28-08, 11:24 PM
Beachcomber wrote:
>> I dislike the feature where it checks website pages for
>> problems, as it means that if you open a google search
>> page, it visits all the links.
>>
>> However it can be turned off, although the tray icon
>> admonishes you for it with a little red exclamation.
>> --
>> Jim Watt
>> http://www.gibnet.com
>
> My PC is about 4 years old and I just installed the free version of
> AVG 8.
>
> I'm very displeased with the speed reduction. Whatever new features
> there are seem to have slowed down the browser to the point where it
> is not usable. Browser pages take longer to load and e-mail was
> noticably slower as well.
>
> I had to disable the autoload of AVG from the system tray because I
> just couldn't stand it anymore. I'm one of those who had used the
> previous freeware version of AVG for years without any problems.
>
> This new version seems to have a stanglehold over system resources
> unless perhaps, your computer is one of the newest and fastest models
> or perhaps the PAY version works better.
>
> Anyone know for sure? Anyone else see the slowdown?
>
> Beachcomber
>
>
As the OP of this thread: I finally did update and I have been quite pleased. I
missed the tray icon that shows when a scan is being done and wrote AVG about
it. While waiting for their reply I found that, during a scan only, the GUI
shows a tag for "Scheduled Scan" and that allows pausing or canceling of a scan.
Then I got the letter from AVG and they said that they were going to return
the tray icon, as well.

The scan takes longer for some reason but I'm rarely in a hurry and find other
things to do while it is going on.

Jim Watt
05-29-08, 06:14 AM
On 28 May 2008 17:48:40 GMT, David James <stopthepigeon@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I'm having issues on my windoze box with it scanning emails and crashing,
>but I only use it as a back up.

Then turn the feature off !
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Klunk
05-29-08, 06:45 AM
On Thu, 29 May 2008 13:14:07 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
writing:

> On 28 May 2008 17:48:40 GMT, David James <stopthepigeon@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>I'm having issues on my windoze box with it scanning emails and
>>crashing, but I only use it as a back up.
>
> Then turn the feature off !

Why not just shut the whole package off on that logic and get something
that works - you stupid trolling f**kwit

Sebastian G.
05-29-08, 06:52 AM
Klunk wrote:

> On Thu, 29 May 2008 13:14:07 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
> writing:
>
>> On 28 May 2008 17:48:40 GMT, David James <stopthepigeon@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm having issues on my windoze box with it scanning emails and
>>> crashing, but I only use it as a back up.
>> Then turn the feature off !
>
> Why not just shut the whole package off on that logic and get something
> that works - you stupid trolling f**kwit


Actually this would be the best choice, since aside from introducing local
privilege escalation vulnerabilities such virus scanners are pretty useless.
Why not try ClamWin which works as an unprivileged process, combined with
WinSnoop which triggers scan activity on FileChangeNotifications?

Klunk
05-29-08, 10:23 AM
On Thu, 29 May 2008 13:52:35 +0200, Sebastian G. passed an empty day by
writing:

> Klunk wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 May 2008 13:14:07 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
>> writing:
>>
>>> On 28 May 2008 17:48:40 GMT, David James <stopthepigeon@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm having issues on my windoze box with it scanning emails and
>>>> crashing, but I only use it as a back up.
>>> Then turn the feature off !
>>
>> Why not just shut the whole package off on that logic and get something
>> that works - you stupid trolling f**kwit
>
>
> Actually this would be the best choice, since aside from introducing
> local privilege escalation vulnerabilities such virus scanners are
> pretty useless. Why not try ClamWin which works as an unprivileged
> process, combined with WinSnoop which triggers scan activity on
> FileChangeNotifications?

Can't find any info on WinSnoop even google lets me down, got a link?

Sebastian G.
05-29-08, 10:53 AM
Klunk wrote:


> Can't find any info on WinSnoop even google lets me down, got a link?


Argh, it should read "WinPooch". Though it does not only use change
notifications, but also some IAT hooking. :-/

Klunk
05-29-08, 11:48 AM
On Thu, 29 May 2008 17:53:53 +0200, Sebastian G. passed an empty day by
writing:

> Klunk wrote:
>
>
>> Can't find any info on WinSnoop even google lets me down, got a link?
>
>
> Argh, it should read "WinPooch". Though it does not only use change
> notifications, but also some IAT hooking. :-/

WinPooch just locks the machine up so I'll give that a miss. Tried it on
my test image and on a virgin XP Pro box I keep for testing. It's pants.

Beachcomber
05-29-08, 11:55 AM
For me, the old AVG worked pretty good and I was happy to recommend it
as a primary virus protection program for a PC.

This new Version 8.0 is invasive of system resources and slows my 4
year old PC down considerably, especially during simple browsing on
IE.

It appears to call up other web sites in the background just to check
the validity of links on whatever page I call up. Yes, I know I can
disable this and other features, but even when I shut down AVG on
startup, it seems that there are processes running in the background
that interfer with IE and either slow it down or make it hang.

When they fix it, I'll be happy to start using it again. Virus
protection is a good thing.

I just don't have the time to experiment with every single setting
(and by default), it seems that every single resource-consuming check
is turned on when you install it.

Just my experience with AVG 8.0, so far...

Sebastian G.
05-29-08, 12:13 PM
Klunk wrote:

> On Thu, 29 May 2008 17:53:53 +0200, Sebastian G. passed an empty day by
> writing:
>
>> Klunk wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Can't find any info on WinSnoop even google lets me down, got a link?
>>
>> Argh, it should read "WinPooch". Though it does not only use change
>> notifications, but also some IAT hooking. :-/
>
> WinPooch just locks the machine up so I'll give that a miss.


How could it lock up the machine? Unless it accidentially triggers a local
unprivileged DoS condition, which in turn would mean that you should analyze
the issue and report it to Microsoft.

Sebastian G.
05-29-08, 12:15 PM
Beachcomber wrote:

> For me, the old AVG worked pretty good and I was happy to recommend it
> as a primary virus protection program for a PC.


Did I miss something? It's a virus scanner, it can't protect from viruses by
design.

> This new Version 8.0 is invasive of system resources and slows my 4
> year old PC down considerably, especially during simple browsing on
> IE.


WTF? You want security, yet you're abusing MSIE as a webbrowser?

Klunk
05-29-08, 03:25 PM
On Thu, 29 May 2008 19:13:45 +0200, Sebastian G. passed an empty day by
writing:

> Klunk wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 May 2008 17:53:53 +0200, Sebastian G. passed an empty day by
>> writing:
>>
>>> Klunk wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Can't find any info on WinSnoop even google lets me down, got a link?
>>>
>>> Argh, it should read "WinPooch". Though it does not only use change
>>> notifications, but also some IAT hooking. :-/
>>
>> WinPooch just locks the machine up so I'll give that a miss.
>
>
> How could it lock up the machine? Unless it accidentially triggers a
> local unprivileged DoS condition, which in turn would mean that you
> should analyze the issue and report it to Microsoft.

Who have said it is sloppy third party coding. Next ?

Sebastian G.
05-29-08, 03:59 PM
Klunk wrote:


>> How could it lock up the machine? Unless it accidentially triggers a
>> local unprivileged DoS condition, which in turn would mean that you
>> should analyze the issue and report it to Microsoft.
>
> Who have said it is sloppy third party coding. Next ?


Find out when and where you've broken your machine.

Klunk
05-30-08, 01:40 AM
On Thu, 29 May 2008 22:59:29 +0200, Sebastian G. passed an empty day by
writing:

> Klunk wrote:
>
>
>>> How could it lock up the machine? Unless it accidentially triggers a
>>> local unprivileged DoS condition, which in turn would mean that you
>>> should analyze the issue and report it to Microsoft.
>>
>> Who have said it is sloppy third party coding. Next ?
>
>
> Find out when and where you've broken your machine.

I have, it was on installation of the Winpooch. Running a number of
Sysinternals tools shows it right up. Process Explorer for one shows it
maxing out. Next?

Sebastian G.
05-30-08, 05:04 AM
Klunk wrote:

> On Thu, 29 May 2008 22:59:29 +0200, Sebastian G. passed an empty day by
> writing:
>
>> Klunk wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> How could it lock up the machine? Unless it accidentially triggers a
>>>> local unprivileged DoS condition, which in turn would mean that you
>>>> should analyze the issue and report it to Microsoft.
>>> Who have said it is sloppy third party coding. Next ?
>>
>> Find out when and where you've broken your machine.
>
> I have, it was on installation of the Winpooch. Running a number of
> Sysinternals tools shows it right up. Process Explorer for one shows it
> maxing out. Next?


OK, and now *where* have you broken it? What changed ACL or configuration
setting made Winpooch trigger your machine lockup? After all, without such
change by you, locking up the machine wouldn't be possible.

(Now please don't tell me you tried installing and running it with admin
privileges...)

Klunk
05-30-08, 05:57 AM
On Fri, 30 May 2008 12:04:43 +0200, Sebastian G. passed an empty day by
writing:

> Klunk wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 May 2008 22:59:29 +0200, Sebastian G. passed an empty day by
>> writing:
>>
>>> Klunk wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> How could it lock up the machine? Unless it accidentially triggers a
>>>>> local unprivileged DoS condition, which in turn would mean that you
>>>>> should analyze the issue and report it to Microsoft.
>>>> Who have said it is sloppy third party coding. Next ?
>>>
>>> Find out when and where you've broken your machine.
>>
>> I have, it was on installation of the Winpooch. Running a number of
>> Sysinternals tools shows it right up. Process Explorer for one shows it
>> maxing out. Next?
>
>
> OK, and now *where* have you broken it? What changed ACL or
> configuration setting made Winpooch trigger your machine lockup? After
> all, without such change by you, locking up the machine wouldn't be
> possible.
>
> (Now please don't tell me you tried installing and running it with admin
> privileges...)

I think you would need to ask the author where *they* have broken it. It
was installed with non-admin privileges and got as far as a splash
screen, system tray icon and hung in a fashion that made Nuremberg look
like a blip. In locking up it managed to try and stop almost *anything*
running, with a maxing out of CPU.

If you think that AVG8 was ****, it does not hold a torch to Winpooch.
It's in the bin with that - but thanks for your interest. As I run Linux
as my OS of choice (go on, have a look at all the headers to satisfy
yourself) I don't really need to be all that concerned with a piece of
**** wincrap that doesn't work. Perhaps if I need something to stop the
machine working I'll put Vista on it next time for a laugh ;-)

If you want to carry on trying to look smart for the last word go right
ahead. I am sorry that the software you suggested was **** and didn't
work for me. I know you are finding hard to accept and that it must hurt
your feelings. Perhaps I can help you with that?

Sebastian G.
05-30-08, 06:22 AM
Klunk wrote:


> I think you would need to ask the author where *they* have broken it.


Sure, but...

> It was installed with non-admin privileges and got as far as a splash
> screen, system tray icon and hung in a fashion that made Nuremberg look
> like a blip. In locking up it managed to try and stop almost *anything*
> running, with a maxing out of CPU.


this shouldn't lock up the machine unless you managed to misconfigure it
somewhere.

> If you think that AVG8 was ****, it does not hold a torch to Winpooch.


Well, I just suggested Winpooch because it seems to be user-friendly. I for
one had simply implemented the needed on-demand scan as a simple script
running in the background.

Jim Watt
05-31-08, 12:51 PM
On 29 May 2008 11:45:18 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:

>Why not just shut the whole package off

Because I want the other features which are useful
and work well.

If you stopped to THINK for a moment which
might involve getting your head out of your
arse, Thats is why AVG give your the option of
selectively enabling features.

Now you have had that explained, **** off.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Jim Watt
05-31-08, 12:51 PM
On Thu, 29 May 2008 19:15:27 +0200, "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de>
wrote:

>WTF? You want security, yet you're abusing MSIE as a webbrowser?

some things only work properly with IE
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Klunk
05-31-08, 02:27 PM
On Sat, 31 May 2008 19:51:11 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
writing:

> On 29 May 2008 11:45:18 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>Why not just shut the whole package off
>
> Because I want the other features which are useful and work well.
>
> If you stopped to THINK for a moment which might involve getting your
> head out of your arse, Thats is why AVG give your the option of
> selectively enabling features.
>
> Now you have had that explained, **** off.

Jim, thanks for your explanation. I'm sorry that you are so touchy about
AVG8. It was rude of me to forget that those on low incomes or welfare
need AV protection too. I guess a half working program where you switch
off the bits that don't work is better than nothing.

Perhaps you could get a grant or a social security loan to help you buy
something suitable and experience the difference in professional
software, or get someone who knows about computers to show you the
alternatives, such as Clam AV or even Linux if you are on a limited
budget.

Kind regards
Klunk.

mandm
05-31-08, 06:12 PM
Klunk wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 19:51:11 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
> writing:
>
>> On 29 May 2008 11:45:18 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Why not just shut the whole package off
>> Because I want the other features which are useful and work well.
>>
>> If you stopped to THINK for a moment which might involve getting your
>> head out of your arse, Thats is why AVG give your the option of
>> selectively enabling features.
>>
>> Now you have had that explained, **** off.
>
> Jim, thanks for your explanation. I'm sorry that you are so touchy about
> AVG8. It was rude of me to forget that those on low incomes or welfare
> need AV protection too. I guess a half working program where you switch
> off the bits that don't work is better than nothing.
>
> Perhaps you could get a grant or a social security loan to help you buy
> something suitable and experience the difference in professional
> software, or get someone who knows about computers to show you the
> alternatives, such as Clam AV or even Linux if you are on a limited
> budget.
>
> Kind regards
> Klunk.

Heh.....You shouldn't feed trolls like Jim Watt.

Certainly you're aware that strutting little peacocks like him generally
use rudeness to cover up their sheer incompetence. He's likely an
XP-off-the-shelf user (installed by someone else) who has never used
anything other than Windows, and parrots the wisdom of similar shrills
who preceded him. This is his life.

Am a little surprised that someone with your sensibilities would be
involved in an AVG conversation...... would've guessed you'd be using
AntiVir/Avira or Kaspersky; in route to Linux or BSD.......

Klunk
06-01-08, 04:30 AM
On Sat, 31 May 2008 19:12:08 -0400, mandm passed an empty day by writing:

> Heh.....You shouldn't feed trolls like Jim Watt.
It is not charitable to turn your back on the less able and those in
need. Normal people are able to see through the abuse and recognise that
it is a mask. It usually comes down to a person who thinks they are near
expert in a subject, but in fact know very little. To try and stop
themselves being made to look stupid they hurl abuse around hoping that
you won't notice they have tried to shift the focus. There also usually
tends to be a lack of achievement, bitterness and poor human contact/
social skills in these people and they deserve pity. Abuse is just the
handrail of a crippled mind and you need to give these simple people a
hand up from the gutter from time to time. You normally tend to find if
you engage them in worthwhile conversation after a while they want to
join in and be included on the same level as everyone else.

> Am a little surprised that someone with your sensibilities would be
> involved in an AVG conversation......
It is freeware, which is always of interest to an Opensource bug like me.
It has not always been rubbish either.

> would've guessed you'd be using
> AntiVir/Avira or Kaspersky; in route to Linux or BSD.......

Ultimately, none of them are any good if you have an idiot working the
box. When I run windows (which is rarely and only for those apps that I
'must have'), I use ClamAV. I made the error of giving AVG8 a spin, and
found it to be pants IMHO. For intrusion detection I've happily used
Snort for a long time.

In the interests of balance it's not just the windows users out there
that suffer from bad code and crashing applications - Linux is pretty
much ace at that too. As far as security goes a Linux user running a
machine with a whole load of open ports and unnecessary services ticking
over is no safer than any other OS user. A Linux user who assumes he is
safe because he runs Linux may be no safer than a windows user who is
savvy to security IMO, that is.

Jim Watt
06-02-08, 02:19 PM
On 31 May 2008 19:27:02 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:

<snip>

Which part of '**** off' do you need explained further?

--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Klunk
06-03-08, 10:12 AM
On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:19:03 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
writing:

> On 31 May 2008 19:27:02 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Which part of '**** off' do you need explained further?

I'm just trying to understand what has gone wrong in your life to make
you feel so aggressive. Do you want to talk about it, or are you getting
some help?

Jim Watt
06-03-08, 12:46 PM
On 03 Jun 2008 15:12:18 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:19:03 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
>writing:
>
>> On 31 May 2008 19:27:02 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Which part of '**** off' do you need explained further?
>
>I'm just trying to understand what has gone wrong in your life to make
>you feel so aggressive.

Although I appreciate your interest, understanding something
might be an intellectual step too far in the dark. The only
problem is morons who cannot understand a simple imperative.

And no, I would rather not talk about it, so **** off.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Klunk
06-05-08, 10:22 AM
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:46:57 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
writing:

> On 03 Jun 2008 15:12:18 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:19:03 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
>>writing:
>>
>>> On 31 May 2008 19:27:02 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Which part of '**** off' do you need explained further?
>>
>>I'm just trying to understand what has gone wrong in your life to make
>>you feel so aggressive.
>
> Although I appreciate your interest, understanding something might be an
> intellectual step too far in the dark. The only problem is morons who
> cannot understand a simple imperative.
>
> And no, I would rather not talk about it, so **** off.

Hi Jim,

I am glad you appreciate my interest. I am sure I can help you deal with
your anger. You see, telling me to '**** off' is making you feel better
and as I don't find it at all offensive there is no harm done - so it is
win * win. Reading on, coming directly to this post is giving you
something to do and a purpose. So, we are making progress. It also shows
that you want to change because you keep coming back and following up, so
clearly you do want to keep talking about it.

You may be unaware that your vocabulary is a little flowery and similar
to that used by people who have been in prison. It is kind of a mix
between trying to appear intelligent with a cliche phrase, in this case
'understanding something might be an intellectual step too far in the
dark', but lacking the ability to complete the paragraph with the same
style with which it was commenced. I point this out purely out of concern
for you as it is very telling.

The use of the word 'imperative' in your response is may be muddled. You
appear to have used it as a noun where it makes little sense. Jim, don't
be disheartened. If you keep on practising (and I am here to reply to you
and help you through this) you may get better with time.

Kind regards
Klunk

Jim Watt
06-07-08, 05:50 PM
On 05 Jun 2008 15:22:37 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:

<snip>

Clearly you lack a life.

Now be a good boy and **** off.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Klunk
06-08-08, 06:55 AM
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 00:50:30 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
writing:

> On 05 Jun 2008 15:22:37 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Clearly you lack a life.
>
> Now be a good boy and **** off.

I just realised Jim, your social and language skills are about as good as
your IT security skills. So I'm glad I ignored your advice on AVG8. I've
left you a pressie on your Webfusion Server - have a good look ;-) Now be
a good boy and sort your security out - that may then qualify you to post
here. No wonder you are so angry and mouthy - you are clueless. How
frustrating that must be for you!


https://212.241.195.240:8443 (Play 'Guess the Password' Username 'admin')

https://212.241.195.240:4643 (Play 'Guess the Password' Username
'administrator')

(ProFTPD) [212.241.195.240] allowing anonymous connections with ProFTPD
default password

RSA key fingerprint is 87:24:4b:ca:16:07:0f:d4:ee:a5:01:67:54:a6:e6:a1.

gibnet.com nameserver = ns2.dns-diy.net.
gibnet.com nameserver = ns1.dns-diy.net.
mail.gibnet.com internet address = 212.241.195.240
ns1.dns-diy.net internet address = 74.200.220.212
ns2.dns-diy.net internet address = 74.200.220.213)

PORT STATE SERVICE
21/tcp open ftp
22/tcp open ssh
25/tcp open smtp - OPEN RELAY (MAIL ENABLE?) INSECURE
53/tcp open domain
80/tcp open http
106/tcp open pop3pw
110/tcp open pop3
135/tcp filtered msrpc
136/tcp filtered profile
137/tcp filtered netbios-ns
138/tcp filtered netbios-dgm
139/tcp filtered netbios-ssn
143/tcp open imap
443/tcp open https
465/tcp open smtps
623/tcp filtered unknown
664/tcp filtered unknown
993/tcp open imaps
995/tcp open pop3s
1720/tcp filtered H.323/Q.931
3306/tcp open mysql - ROOT ACCOUNT INSECURE/NO PASSWORD
5190/tcp open aol
8443/tcp open https-alt

gibnet.com
BLINDSTEDT.COM
JAENIA.COM
MILLIONTC.NET
NEBULASTARGRAPHICS.COM
PCDISCO.COM
audiohypnosis.net
brympton.net
connect.gi
conservatives.gi
conservativesabroad.eu
drummonds.gi
eidobello.com
esg-gib.net
gallerymosaic.com
gibinquirer.net
giblaw.net
gibnews.net
gibradio.net
gsd.gi
history.gi
incambridge.com
jaenia.com
janelangdon.com
jazzure.com
llanito.net
maryceleste.net
milliontc.net
mymanifesting.com
phillips.gi
sg2training.com
sgextra.com
survivethefuture.net
thecannonbar.com
thenewpeople.net
tianalangdon.com
tibbywand.com
travelxcel.net
warehamchildcare.org
watergardensvideos.com
williams.gi

Multiple insecurities found

Seems to have an identity crisis....

Mr Ree
gibdomains@yahoo.com tel: +350.00000
jimwatt@pobox.com +35073285
PO Box 397
Gibraltar, Europe NONE,Gibraltar, Europe.
--
Lindstedt, Brenda gibdomains@yahoo.com +1.555555555
Ressubeckka Arts
3201 Devonshire Street
Duluth, MN 55806,Duluth, MN 55806,US
--
POBOX.COM
I C Group, Inc
(888)762-6926
hostmast@icgroup.com
--
Unit 22, Watergardens 6, Gibraltar - Tel/Fax: (350) 70534
newsdawg.com

Jim Watt
06-08-08, 11:50 AM
On 08 Jun 2008 11:55:56 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:

<snip>

**** off and die.

--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Klunk
06-08-08, 12:03 PM
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 18:50:51 +0200, Jim Watt passed an empty day by
writing:

> On 08 Jun 2008 11:55:56 GMT, Klunk <bill.gates@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> **** off and die.

I've told you already, I don't find language like that offensive at all.
It just makes me smile. Sorted that sever out yet, thanks for letting me
use it as a proxy. I did ask, did I not?

There was a dick called Jim Watt,
Who knew much less than I'd forgot,
His mouth and abuse was really no use,
And his hosting was just full of snot.

Go on Jim, Smile - you know you want to join in.

laura lou
08-17-08, 07:59 AM
I am running win xp serv pk 3 and recently was plagued by the 'antivirus xp 2008' virus thingy.... i (think) successfully got rid of it using malwarebytes and have run countless amounts of scans using this and avg 7 or so and it appears to be gone.

following this scare, i downloaded the new version of avg 8 and on restarting my pc, i was greeted by the welcome screen and when i tried to access my account, it flashed to the desktop then back to the welcome screen....

i used system restore via safe mode and seem to be back to working normal, although i have no avg protection now.....

any ideas or knowledge as to why this is happening? or suggestions to what i should do.... i havnt experienced any other problems with avg before and i find it a bit strange it would affect my computer in such a drastic way.....

thanks to all who hopefuly shed light on this.........

napsters
08-18-08, 08:04 AM
Go to safe mode...then find and delete this file

Associated Antivirus XP 2008 Files:

Note, Some of these files and folders may be random:

C:\WINDOWS\qegbdmwf.dll
C:\WINDOWS\pntqkflv.dll
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\database.dat
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\license.txt
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\MFC71.dll
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\MFC71ENU.DLL
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\msvcp71.dll
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\msvcr71.dll
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\rhcnkrj0etfg.exe
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\rhcnkrj0etfg.exe.local
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\rhcnkrj0etfgSkin.dll
c:\Program Files\rhcnkrj0etfg\Uninstall.exe
c:\WINDOWS\system32\pphcjkrj0etfg.exe
c:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Antivirus XP 2008.lnk
c:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\Antivirus XP 2008
c:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\Antivirus XP 2008.lnk
c:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\Antivirus XP 2008\Antivirus XP 2008.lnk
c:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\Antivirus XP 2008\How to Register Antivirus XP 2008.lnk
c:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\Antivirus XP 2008\License Agreement.lnk
c:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\Antivirus XP 2008\Register Antivirus XP 2008.lnk
c:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\Antivirus XP 2008\Uninstall.lnk
%UserProfile%\Application Data\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch\Antivirus XP 2008.lnk
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine\Autorun
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine\Autorun\HKCU
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine\Autorun\HKCU\RunOnce
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine\Autorun\HKLM
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine\Autorun\HKLM\RunOnce
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine\Autorun\StartMenuAllUsers
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine\Autorun\StartMenuCurrentUser
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine\BrowserObjects
%UserProfile%\Application Data\rhcnkrj0etfg\Quarantine\Packages



Associated Antivirus XP 2008 Windows Registry Information:

Note, Some of these Registry keys and values may be random:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\rhcnkrj0etfg
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\rhcnkrj0etfg
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion "rhcnkrj0etfg"
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings\User Agent\Post Platform "AntivirXP08"
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run "SMrhcnkrj0etfg"



This is a self-help guide. Use at your own risk.