|
Dice Dice Baby posted:Or WinDirStat which makes pretty graphs Spacemonger makes similar graphs that are functional.   fake edit: but yeah, both are fit for purpose
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:02 |
|
|
Colors 
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
Secunia just did something weird. Its main icon (i.e. the one for psi.exe) just up and disappeared, leaving that ugly Windows placeholder icon. I tried clearing the icon cache but that was ineffective. Instead I decided to reinstall PSI, which brought the icon back, but now the tray icon is missing. psi_tray.exe is running and is in the startup folder where it belongs. The tray icon just... isn't there anymore.  EDIT: Oh, it's working now somehow 
Mak0rz fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Oct 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 19:19
|
|
|
Treesize is a way better way of visually arranging where your disk space has gone. Both of those look like dogshit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 10:51
|
|
|
This is my first post so go easy. Giving my thumbs up for Temp File Cleaner (http://addpcs.com/software/tfc/) for removing lots of temp files and windows clutter. It covers some items the mighty CCleaner doesn't, for example uninstall backups from the Windows folder in XP. I use it regularly on systems, particularly on older machines, in its portable form.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
Kungfu Lizard posted:This is my first post so go easy. Giving my thumbs up for Temp File Cleaner (http://addpcs.com/software/tfc/) for removing lots of temp files and windows clutter. It covers some items the mighty CCleaner doesn't, for example uninstall backups from the Windows folder in XP. In my quest to find out what the "limited" version doesn't do that the "pro" version does, I came across something like 15 different locations where it tells you how much better the paid version is (no details on how), a post explaining how they no longer bundle malware with the install, a different post explaining how the option to not install the malware wasn't working, a comment section which is 100% Viagra spam, and a poorly worded page that coincidentally shares your own "is it Google translate or is he trying too hard?" writing style. I found out why it was hidden in the end - all the "pro" version does is let you load network drives. Versions on CNET average at about 2.5/5 stars, which is (hilariously) blatant shills trying to out-voice the people saying "this is utterly poo poo, also it contains malware". As a word of advice, when you're paying for people to post on CNET/softpedia for you, pick a proper company who do this that are based in an English speaking country. The identically-broken English and recycled comments from one to another are obvious even to a home user flicking through. You even recycled some of the language used in the "user reviews" when you posted your own Wikipedia article (which is a cloned product description from your site) -- which is really what I'm going to get off on, as it proves this so resolutely that it's all I will need to poke the right buttons and have this removed from the major download sites. Was I gentle on you, you post-to-advertise shill chucklefuck? fake edit: the software is also a piece of poo poo and you should use CCleaner which is better in any and all measurable ways. fe2: I used "you" but perhaps you're just someone being paid a lovely wage to talk about lovely software you'd never use online v  v
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
Well that was weird. I have no connection to the software at all i just use it. I dont know where all that bile came from. edit: actually i will address some of the points you made. I do use CCleaner it is very good, most people that deal with computer servicing use it as a matter of course. As stated I dont use the 'install' i use the 'portable' version so i have no experience with any embedded malware I see from your previous posts your an experienced and diligent IT professional, albeit an angry one  so i wont take your comments to heartOnce again i'm nothing to do with the software or its maker and i haven't posted on any of their forums, i use it and i haven't had any problems with it Kungfu Lizard fucked around with this message at 09:38 on Oct 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 09:14
|
|
|
I was just reading about the Crypto Locker virus that's making the rounds. Can these type viruses affect all of the drives on your computer or just the C: drive?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
Mister Kingdom posted:I was just reading about the Crypto Locker virus that's making the rounds. Can these type viruses affect all of the drives on your computer or just the C: drive? Everything including network shares.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
Mister Kingdom posted:I was just reading about the Crypto Locker virus that's making the rounds. Can these type viruses affect all of the drives on your computer or just the C: drive? Open any given program and anywhere you can "Save as.." the virus can encrypt.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 22:03
|
|
|
I'm loving fed up with McAfee. The OP recommends Microsoft Security Essentials; is it an appropriate replacement?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 07:25
|
|
|
Krazyface posted:I'm loving fed up with McAfee. The OP recommends Microsoft Security Essentials; is it an appropriate replacement? I use NOD32 Antivirus personally, but Security Essentials is decent and better than McAfee in terms of simplicity and system resource usage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 13:23
|
|
|
Krazyface posted:I'm loving fed up with McAfee. The OP recommends Microsoft Security Essentials; is it an appropriate replacement? Why are you fed up with McAfee? And no Microsoft Security Essentials is not a good choice anymore, well if you want something that will never ever bother you, never ever detect false positives then sure its good for that but protection is very poor, in fact its literally the only AV now that keeps failing today's AV tests, it's the class retard now. But really AV's don't even matter nowadays, browser security has never been better, what with Adblocker Plus and NoScript add-ons for example, having huge built in blacklists of websites, it's almost impossible to get a virus now just browsing the internet now. The only thing you need to do is be smart, don't click on random exe files you got from a random internet place/torrent unless you have Sandboxie (Serisouly get Sandboxie), if you get a weird e-mail saying you were hacked, look closely at the url because its probably not legit, if an icon looks strange/not normal, try unhiding your computers known extensions because that "something.pdf" might actually be a "something.pdf.exe".
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 13:32
|
|
|
Im_Special posted:And no Microsoft Security Essentials is not a good choice anymore, well if you want something that will never ever bother you, never ever detect false positives then sure its good for that but protection is very poor, in fact its literally the only AV now that keeps failing today's AV tests, it's the class retard now. quote:But really AV's don't even matter nowadays, browser security has never been better, what with Adblocker Plus and NoScript add-ons for example, having huge built in blacklists of websites, it's almost impossible to get a virus now just browsing the internet now. NoScript! will block likely 90% of them, but is still vulnerable as a suggestion because: - it gets annoying and people decide to just allow globally - if something you've allowed later gets exploited / seemed OK at the time but actually isn't, you're just as boned. I don't want to sound like a dick, but advice like yours is why the Zeus (and others) botnet is enormous; people have no idea they're infected, assuming they're clean because "[I don't] click on random exe files you got from a random internet place/torrent" e: McAffee is the poster-child of lovely AVs and the guy should swap it for literally anything else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 13:51
|
|
|
Edit: never mind.
Red Dad Redemption fucked around with this message at 01:46 on Oct 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
OK then, if not McAfee or MSE, what's the best free option out there?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
Microsoft Security Essentials remains the recommended AV program because it doesn't cause system problems or false-positives. "Uninstall all third-party AV software and try again" is the first step in Haus troubleshooting because it solves the problem so frequently. Similarly, false positives aren't a side-effect of software trying very hard to protect you, they are intentionally generated by commercial software to give users the impression the software is doing something and thus worth paying for. For example, when ESET starts throwing malicious content warnings because it found obfuscated JavaScript in an ad, a user is going to think "wow look at what ESET blocked that MSE didn't!", not "ESET is throwing fake warnings to scare me." Im_Special is correct that the best way to protect your system is to follow the steps in the OP. If you are running a supported version of Chrome or Firefox you are only vulnerable to plug-in exploits. The simplest way to deal with this is only use plug-ins you need (should be only Flash), and to keep them updated. Firefox will disable Flash for you and prompt you to update it if you have an insecure version, Chrome bundles Flash and will update it itself. Trying to use an antivirus program to protect you from a vulnerable plug-in is like saying "oh it's okay that this condom has a hole in it, I've got some good antibiotics in the bathroom!" That doesn't mean that there isn't value to AV programs with higher detection rates, and if you are familiar enough with computers to troubleshoot any issues and to recognize how to respond to alerts (so you aren't confused by false positives) it can be a reasonable choice to make. You should NOT assume that switching from MSE to an AV program that has higher detections in industry-sponsored benchmarks is an unqualified improvement, there are very real downsides that would keep rational people from switching from MSE.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
Alereon, when did you last look over the 'argument for MSE' and sanity-check it for MSE 2013, not the MSE that existed a couple of years ago and tried to compete with the rest? In that time it's performance has done this: and all-but everyone, including Microsoft themselves, have stopped recommending it. quote:it doesn't cause system problems or false-positives - Various Adobe products - Various CD burning tools - Folding@home // seti@home - some ePOS clients - it's broken several well-known and trusted anti-malware apps - despite meagre detection capabilities, it has a middling performance score - I'm not going to Google to find more examples than I can remember, but it's surely not 'none'. .. of course, in the same way as with 3rd party vendors, any issues like this arising are usually fixed the same day, often in hours. quote:"Uninstall all third-party AV software and try again" is the first step in Haus troubleshooting because it solves the problem so frequently quote:Similarly, false positives aren't a side-effect of software trying very hard to protect you e: Some pop-ups can certainly be misleading, but most vendors are moving away from confusing pop-ups to "stay silent by default" - and these popups aren't what's meant as false positives anyway. quote:Trying to use an antivirus program to protect you from a vulnerable plug-in is like saying "oh it's okay that this condom has a hole in it, I've got some good antibiotics in the bathroom!" quote:You should NOT assume that switching from MSE to an AV program that has higher detections in industry-sponsored benchmarks is an unqualified improvement, there are very real downsides that would keep rational people from switching from MSE It's not a slight difference, either. Top-tier AVs detect 98-100 in test groups. MSE is currently testing at 71% When uninstalling a decent 3rd party AV takes your risk from 0-2% to ~30% it's pretty hard to say "it doesn't cause system problems" - virus infections are system problems and can lead to much more severe consequences (data loss, identity theft) than your AV reporting a false positive on an unsigned exe with some bad coding you pulled off the back of a freeware site, which is pretty much the only files which generate the false positives you seem so concerned about. Khablam fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Oct 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2013 02:46
|
|
|
I've been using NOD32 AV for about 7 years now and I've never had any issues with system stability or performance, plus it's saved my rear end from a fair few potential infections. I've got 3 family members using Microsoft Security Essentials. Is there a consensus anymore on what's the best free AV? Reading the last few posts has worried me that I've leaving my family's machine's vulnerable. Might just go ahead and buy 3 NOD32 licences.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
Using Malware Bytes/MSE along with most of the other suggestions in this thread has kept me virus free for a long time. I guess Malware Bytes/Nod32 would be better though. Sephiroth_IRA fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Nov 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 15:49
|
|
|
Avast! beats the 92% malware protection rate for MSE in the most recent real world test by AVComparatives (as does almost every other tested option, mind you). I've been using the free version for a few months now, and it doesn't seem to cause much trouble. I find it mostly unobtrusive, though occasionally if you run an EXE it's not familiar with it'll stop the process from completing until it scans the program. Avast! would be my recommendation for the present, paired up with MalwareBytes, and use the Task Scheduler to automatically update and run MalwaeBytes on whatever PC for your family you're installing on.
Mo_Steel fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Nov 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 16:25
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:I find it mostly unobtrusive, though occasionally if you run an EXE it's not familiar with it'll stop the process from completing until it scans the program If this annoys you then you can stop the behaviour. I would recommend leaving it on, though, as it's a very hard wall against which it's hard to make any exe run without you expressly allowing it, or it's already known to be good. I think by default it only does it when: 1) The executable isn't digitally signed and 2) There's not enough information to say it's good (an unsigned exe which is 'known-good' within the community doesn't need approval) For what it's worth, when it comes to single-file detection it's useful to have the Virus Total Uploader installed, so a file-scan with 47 A/Vs is 2 clicks away. https://www.virustotal.com/en-gb/documentation/desktop-applications/ It returns results near-instantly if the hash is known.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
Khablam posted:If this annoys you then you can stop the behaviour. I would recommend leaving it on, though, as it's a very hard wall against which it's hard to make any exe run without you expressly allowing it, or it's already known to be good. Yeah, I intend to leave it on. Most of the few times it has flagged has been when I'm running an application that I compiled through VS myself, which is the exact sort of situation you'd want an AV to step in and say "Whoa hold on, what's this and what is it doing?" Didn't know they had a desktop version of Virus Total though, very nice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 21:41
|
|
|
Been using Avast for several years after AVG got bloated/annoying. Years back it was more intrusive and confusing compared to others but it has come a long way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
Does Avast still default to playing an obnoxious siren and voice clip for detections?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
dis astranagant posted:Does Avast still default to playing an obnoxious siren and voice clip for detections? Sound is on by default, but it's no longer RED ALERT. It makes a "ting ting ting" sound and then says threat detected. Since the newest version the boxes are no longer large and red, but quite small and white as well. It seems all AVs are moving towards "try not to be seen" as a strategy these days, mind. e: if you turn sounds off, the setting persists across updates.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 15:51
|
|
|
Could anyone recommend ESET Smart Security over NOD32 or is it bloatware?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 11:22
|
|
|
DEAD MAN'S SHOE posted:Could anyone recommend ESET Smart Security over NOD32 or is it bloatware? It has firewall stuff, but otherwise I tend to just use NOD
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 04:36
|
|
|
Nod is 5 bucks on newegg right now. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...tivirus-_-LEB0E
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 14:55
|
|
|
Thanks! A very good deal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 16:51
|
|
|
E: I am dumb. Sorry.
So Math fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Dec 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 05:51
|
|
|
Mak0rz posted:Secunia just did something weird. Its main icon (i.e. the one for psi.exe) just up and disappeared, leaving that ugly Windows placeholder icon. I tried clearing the icon cache but that was ineffective. Instead I decided to reinstall PSI, which brought the icon back, but now the tray icon is missing. Secunia absolutely struggles to function on Windows 7 64-bit. I had to run it in comparability mode for XP SP2. I kept getting a "Keep running this script?" warning and then Secunia would crash. Despite all it's accolades it gives me pause when security software has such serious trouble running. My understanding is that other users on multiple OS's have had issues as well, which is a real shame. I am not a huge fan of Avast (but I do use it) and it looks like Avast does check for outdated software. Since I'm in bitching mode, I can't believe you guys didn't mention Shields UP! from Gibson Research for checking your firewall. Three-Phase fucked around with this message at 02:08 on Dec 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 01:50
|
|
|
Secunia is pretty awkward, you're right. If you want to use it, just open it when you need to and leave it to run alone when you do. Shields UP! is all well and good, but has very limited use in scanning anything behind a NAT.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 04:32
|
|
|
Orange_Lazarus posted:Nod is 5 bucks on newegg right now. Missed out on this, anyone seen any similar deals?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
In my opinion the best defense is awareness. I thought I would share my personal mantra. It's served me well and I've never really had malicious software problems. Far more often I have broken Windows myself doing things I shouldn't have been doing. When in doubt, don't download. Whenever downloading anything you don't know the source of, look for any community comments regarding it's validitiy. Critically, understand the modern nature of the internet. webpages are sewn together from many sources and could contain malicious links unrelated to your search or the page's provider. The most common example is the fake download button. Also know that many modern media formats have the ability to include embedded code. A PDF is a good example of this. Be suspicious of all downloads- if you aren't sure if it can include embedded code; assume it can. You don't need to run general-purpose active defense programs if you aren't downloading lots of shady stuff and are high in technical aptitude. Instead keep handy antivirus, and anti-malware tools. Use them occasionally to remove any potentially unwanted programs. Or just when you're not suing your computer for anything else. Keep Windows itself and Windows Defender fully updated and active. Use your firewall. If you normally only frequent trusted sites you aren't at high risk. Despite popular opinion, Windows is actually fairly secure and most severely malware-ridden systems get that way because the user is reckless and unaware of potential threats. Furthermore, common malicious software is typically fairly primitive and will generally not dissiminate itself beyond a single specific target program, group of applications, or Windows services. Plan B should always be to have all your files stored independent of your operating system. At minimum, you should partition your hard drive and keep your most valuable files separately. A day spent re-installing windows and applications might be easier than a day spent tring to untangle a mess of personal files and applications from an operating system that will not boot on a different computer. Staying some semblance of organized will save you a lot of hassle if anything ever does go really, terribly wrong. In summary: bring a knife to the minefield. When your legs get blown off, have extra legs. Edit: Ad Block Plus, Ad Block Plus, Ad Block Plus. For example, AV might not detect a key-logger running in a banner advert on a web-page; or be able to do anything about it. Keep unique passwords on all your accounts. Keep unique passwords on all your accounts. Diet Lime fucked around with this message at 03:54 on Dec 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
Diet Lime posted:You don't need to run general-purpose active defense programs if you aren't downloading lots of shady stuff and are high in technical aptitude Yeah, this isn't the case at all. The overwhelming majority of all malware is installed via browser/java/flash exploits that have no user interaction. It's this line of reasoning which explains why botnets are as massive as they are; people naively think they're not at risk so need do nothing about it. quote:If you normally only frequent trusted sites you aren't at high risk quote:common malicious software is typically fairly primitive and will generally not dissiminate itself beyond a single specific target program quote:At minimum, you should partition your hard drive and keep your most valuable files separately quote:Use your firewall quote:For example, AV might not detect a key-logger running in a banner advert on a web-page  quote:In summary: bring a knife to the minefield. When your legs get blown off, have extra legs
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 16:41
|
|
|
You're all wet
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 08:39
|
|
|
I've been using Avast for as long as I remember and never had a single false positive. It is sometimes annoying because in case it doesn't know an exe file it prompts you for actions but that's very rare. It happened when I was coding some poo poo and it didn't know the executable file but that is easily fixed. Just don't forget to disable the sounds in options  that poo poo is annoying as all hell
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 10:48
|
|
|
I get false positives with Avast all the time. Most recent being the Google Chrome Update. It also lights up on random jpegs posted in forums.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 03:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:02 |
|
|
Re-install it, that can't be anything other than some manner of corruption of the install. You can test this by sending a file Avast thinks is shady to virustotal; if the Avast! line of the results (which is set to maximum detection / heuristic sensitivity) is clean, your system is wonkey somewhere. For example, the recent Chrome update is not a false positive being experienced by anyone else. The most likely cause is some other security software messing about with files Avast is trying to scan, and making it think something bad is going on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 18:01
|
|