Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #8068 > unrolled thread

[OT] Malware not working

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10

Contents

  [OT] Malware not working Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2015-09-15 12:26 -0300
    Re: [OT] Malware not working "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-15 11:33 -0400
      Re: [OT] Malware not working Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2015-09-15 13:23 -0300
        Re: [OT] Malware not working "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-15 12:30 -0400
          Re: [OT] Malware not working knuttle <keith_nuttle@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-15 17:11 -0400
            Re: [OT] Malware not working Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-15 23:48 +0200
            Re: [OT] Malware not working "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-15 20:20 -0400
              Re: [OT] Malware not working Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 00:30 +0000
                Re: [OT] Malware not working "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-15 20:38 -0400
                  Re: [OT] Malware not working Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 01:01 +0000
    Re: [OT] Malware not working "p-0''0-h the cat (ES)" <super.pooh@fluffyunderbelly.invalid> - 2015-09-15 16:43 +0100
    Re: [OT] Malware not working Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2015-09-16 01:40 +0000

#8068 — [OT] Malware not working

//Re Ransom.Win32.Shade, Trojan.Encoder.858 and Ranson:Win32/Troldesh.

A victim visiting a compromised site (either one that belongs to
cybercriminals or a site that has been hacked)is unwittingly infected.

Kaspersky explained that the victim typically has no clue that the
site is compromised and malicious code on the website exploits a
vulnerability in the browser or a plugin, and the Trojan is then
covertly installed in the system, the post said. Unlike the spam
delivery method, the victim doesn't even have to run an executable
file.//

	I visited all the sites infected with the malware, but could
not catch it. Something about Win XP not being compatible. Is there a
quick fix for this ? 
	Installing Win 10 takes too long, by the time I've made my
system vulnerable, the malware will have moved.
	TIA
	[]'s
-- 
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy  - Google 2012

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#8069

On 2015-09-15 11:26 AM, Shadow wrote:
> //Re Ransom.Win32.Shade, Trojan.Encoder.858 and Ranson:Win32/Troldesh.
> 
> A victim visiting a compromised site (either one that belongs to
> cybercriminals or a site that has been hacked)is unwittingly infected.
> 
> Kaspersky explained that the victim typically has no clue that the
> site is compromised and malicious code on the website exploits a
> vulnerability in the browser or a plugin, and the Trojan is then
> covertly installed in the system, the post said. Unlike the spam
> delivery method, the victim doesn't even have to run an executable
> file.//
> 
> 	I visited all the sites infected with the malware, but could
> not catch it. Something about Win XP not being compatible. Is there a
> quick fix for this ? 
> 	Installing Win 10 takes too long, by the time I've made my
> system vulnerable, the malware will have moved.
> 	TIA
> 	[]'s

I'd love a URL to test the automatic infection. Can you provide one?

-- 
A.M

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8073

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:33:28 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:

>On 2015-09-15 11:26 AM, Shadow wrote:
>> //Re Ransom.Win32.Shade, Trojan.Encoder.858 and Ranson:Win32/Troldesh.
>> 
>> A victim visiting a compromised site (either one that belongs to
>> cybercriminals or a site that has been hacked)is unwittingly infected.
>> 
>> Kaspersky explained that the victim typically has no clue that the
>> site is compromised and malicious code on the website exploits a
>> vulnerability in the browser or a plugin, and the Trojan is then
>> covertly installed in the system, the post said. Unlike the spam
>> delivery method, the victim doesn't even have to run an executable
>> file.//
>> 
>> 	I visited all the sites infected with the malware, but could
>> not catch it. Something about Win XP not being compatible. Is there a
>> quick fix for this ? 
>> 	Installing Win 10 takes too long, by the time I've made my
>> system vulnerable, the malware will have moved.
>> 	TIA
>> 	[]'s
>
>I'd love a URL to test the automatic infection. Can you provide one?

	Sorry, the admin of the ones I visited uninstalled win 10 and
replaced it with Debian or even (aggghhh) Ubuntu. But if I find more,
you'll be the first one to know.
	Or just install win 10 yourself, and browse the net. There are
millions of zero days out there. I think even a virtual Win 10 running
from Linux will work.
	[]'s

	PS I have no legal responsibility if you DO decide to install
win 10. Do it your own risk. The rest of my TOS is encrypted, as is
win 10's.
-- 
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy  - Google 2012

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8074

On 2015-09-15 12:23 PM, Shadow wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:33:28 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-09-15 11:26 AM, Shadow wrote:
>>> //Re Ransom.Win32.Shade, Trojan.Encoder.858 and Ranson:Win32/Troldesh.
>>>
>>> A victim visiting a compromised site (either one that belongs to
>>> cybercriminals or a site that has been hacked)is unwittingly infected.
>>>
>>> Kaspersky explained that the victim typically has no clue that the
>>> site is compromised and malicious code on the website exploits a
>>> vulnerability in the browser or a plugin, and the Trojan is then
>>> covertly installed in the system, the post said. Unlike the spam
>>> delivery method, the victim doesn't even have to run an executable
>>> file.//
>>>
>>> 	I visited all the sites infected with the malware, but could
>>> not catch it. Something about Win XP not being compatible. Is there a
>>> quick fix for this ? 
>>> 	Installing Win 10 takes too long, by the time I've made my
>>> system vulnerable, the malware will have moved.
>>> 	TIA
>>> 	[]'s
>>
>> I'd love a URL to test the automatic infection. Can you provide one?
> 
> 	Sorry, the admin of the ones I visited uninstalled win 10 and
> replaced it with Debian or even (aggghhh) Ubuntu. But if I find more,
> you'll be the first one to know.
> 	Or just install win 10 yourself, and browse the net. There are
> millions of zero days out there. I think even a virtual Win 10 running
> from Linux will work.
> 	[]'s
> 
> 	PS I have no legal responsibility if you DO decide to install
> win 10. Do it your own risk. The rest of my TOS is encrypted, as is
> win 10's.

I have been using Windows 10 since released and without any anti-virus.
Somehow, I'm still alive.


-- 
A.M

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8115

On 9/15/2015 12:30 PM, A.M wrote:
> I have been using Windows 10 since released and without any anti-virus.
> Somehow, I'm still alive.

Without any antivirus, or without any third party antivirus?

Windows 10 comes with Windows Defender as a default antivirus.  When you 
install Windows 10, Defender is installed an activated as part of the 
OS, it is updates as as other parts of the OS when Windows 10 decides to 
install updates.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8118

knuttle wrote:

> On 9/15/2015 12:30 PM, A.M wrote:
>> I have been using Windows 10 since released and without any anti-virus.
>> Somehow, I'm still alive.
> 
> Without any antivirus, or without any third party antivirus?
> 
> Windows 10 comes with Windows Defender as a default antivirus.  When you
> install Windows 10, Defender is installed an activated as part of the
> OS, it is updates as as other parts of the OS when Windows 10 decides to
> install updates.

Defender is a typical MS product

In all tests of AV software it came out last place or second last

In short: As shitty as to be expected. MS software at its "best"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8124

On 2015-09-15 5:11 PM, knuttle wrote:
> On 9/15/2015 12:30 PM, A.M wrote:
>> I have been using Windows 10 since released and without any anti-virus.
>> Somehow, I'm still alive.
> 
> Without any antivirus, or without any third party antivirus?

Yes.

> Windows 10 comes with Windows Defender as a default antivirus.  When you
> install Windows 10, Defender is installed an activated as part of the
> OS, it is updates as as other parts of the OS when Windows 10 decides to
> install updates.

Except that all tests show that Windows Defender is an awful anti-virus
and doesn't protect anyone from anything. It's the same as not having an
anti-virus alone. Of course, I'm very willing to bet that without a real
anti-virus and relying solely on the garbage Microsoft provides, I still
won't get infected the way these lying advocates always seem to.


-- 
A.M

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8126

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:20:30 -0400, A.M wrote:

> On 2015-09-15 5:11 PM, knuttle wrote:
>> On 9/15/2015 12:30 PM, A.M wrote:
>>> I have been using Windows 10 since released and without any
>>> anti-virus.
>>> Somehow, I'm still alive.
>> 
>> Without any antivirus, or without any third party antivirus?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> Windows 10 comes with Windows Defender as a default antivirus.  When
>> you install Windows 10, Defender is installed an activated as part of
>> the OS, it is updates as as other parts of the OS when Windows 10
>> decides to install updates.
> 
> Except that all tests show that Windows Defender is an awful anti-virus
> and doesn't protect anyone from anything. It's the same as not having an
> anti-virus alone. Of course, I'm very willing to bet that without a real
> anti-virus and relying solely on the garbage Microsoft provides, I still
> won't get infected the way these lying advocates always seem to.

No, all tests don't show that.  They do show that it isn't very good by 
itself, but it does catch some on its own.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8127

On 2015-09-15 8:30 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:20:30 -0400, A.M wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-09-15 5:11 PM, knuttle wrote:
>>> On 9/15/2015 12:30 PM, A.M wrote:
>>>> I have been using Windows 10 since released and without any
>>>> anti-virus.
>>>> Somehow, I'm still alive.
>>>
>>> Without any antivirus, or without any third party antivirus?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>> Windows 10 comes with Windows Defender as a default antivirus.  When
>>> you install Windows 10, Defender is installed an activated as part of
>>> the OS, it is updates as as other parts of the OS when Windows 10
>>> decides to install updates.
>>
>> Except that all tests show that Windows Defender is an awful anti-virus
>> and doesn't protect anyone from anything. It's the same as not having an
>> anti-virus alone. Of course, I'm very willing to bet that without a real
>> anti-virus and relying solely on the garbage Microsoft provides, I still
>> won't get infected the way these lying advocates always seem to.
> 
> No, all tests don't show that.  They do show that it isn't very good by 
> itself, but it does catch some on its own.

I wouldn't trust it either way. If I didn't make an image of my hard
disk every week and keep all of my most important data on a USB key, I'd
probably use a third-party anti-virus but I don't see the point.
However, if I do indeed get infected in drive-by fashion as Shadow
suggested in one of today's posts, I will have no choice but to move
away from the operating system in general.


-- 
A.M

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8129

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:38:33 -0400, A.M wrote:

> On 2015-09-15 8:30 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:20:30 -0400, A.M wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2015-09-15 5:11 PM, knuttle wrote:
>>>> On 9/15/2015 12:30 PM, A.M wrote:
>>>>> I have been using Windows 10 since released and without any
>>>>> anti-virus.
>>>>> Somehow, I'm still alive.
>>>>
>>>> Without any antivirus, or without any third party antivirus?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>> Windows 10 comes with Windows Defender as a default antivirus.  When
>>>> you install Windows 10, Defender is installed an activated as part of
>>>> the OS, it is updates as as other parts of the OS when Windows 10
>>>> decides to install updates.
>>>
>>> Except that all tests show that Windows Defender is an awful
>>> anti-virus and doesn't protect anyone from anything. It's the same as
>>> not having an anti-virus alone. Of course, I'm very willing to bet
>>> that without a real anti-virus and relying solely on the garbage
>>> Microsoft provides, I still won't get infected the way these lying
>>> advocates always seem to.
>> 
>> No, all tests don't show that.  They do show that it isn't very good by
>> itself, but it does catch some on its own.
> 
> I wouldn't trust it either way. If I didn't make an image of my hard
> disk every week and keep all of my most important data on a USB key, I'd
> probably use a third-party anti-virus but I don't see the point.
> However, if I do indeed get infected in drive-by fashion as Shadow
> suggested in one of today's posts, I will have no choice but to move
> away from the operating system in general.

I use it and malwarebytes.  Great combo.




-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8071

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 12:26:11 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:

>	I visited all the sites infected with the malware, but could
>not catch it. Something about Win XP not being compatible. Is there a
>quick fix for this ? 

What? The virus gave you a warning that your OS wasn't compatible with
its system requirements. Now I've heard it all.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

-- 
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath, 
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme, 
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook, 
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag, 
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, 
the most complete ignoid, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8133

Shadow <Sh@dow.br> news:tldgvalae67qbrj8dkg9l8ck3mseq0feb0@4ax.com
Tue, 15 Sep 2015 15:26:11 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote: 

> //Re Ransom.Win32.Shade, Trojan.Encoder.858 and
> Ranson:Win32/Troldesh. 
> 
> A victim visiting a compromised site (either one that belongs to
> cybercriminals or a site that has been hacked)is unwittingly
> infected. 
> 
> Kaspersky explained that the victim typically has no clue that the
> site is compromised and malicious code on the website exploits a
> vulnerability in the browser or a plugin, and the Trojan is then
> covertly installed in the system, the post said. Unlike the spam
> delivery method, the victim doesn't even have to run an executable
> file.//
> 
>      I visited all the sites infected with the malware, but could
> not catch it. Something about Win XP not being compatible. Is
> there a quick fix for this ? 
>      Installing Win 10 takes too long, by the time I've made my
> system vulnerable, the malware will have moved.
>      TIA
>      []'s

MAHAHAHAH

Now, I don't have to look for ANY specific examples of 'self 
installing' malware for the pooh. You just did it for me. [g] Unless, 
he wants to argue with Kaspersky Labs. MUAHAHAHA.



-- 
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.os.windows-10

csiph-web