|
Isn't W3Schools basing that entirely on their own traffic, e.g. theoretically developers and other people who get there by falling for their out of date SEO clickbait?
|
# ? Sep 9, 2014 18:48 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 22:24 |
|
http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201309-201408 Still, going down
|
# ? Sep 9, 2014 20:06 |
|
Came across an interesting one yesterday. Was at my neighbor's to help her with some minor thing, but couldn't help noticing all of her browsers started on sweet-page.com or something and that websites would have ads appear on a pop-over. She said that she ran some scans yesterday and cleaned a bunch of things off. Further scans turned up nothing. But oddly enough any second browser window showed her actual home page. Turns out that it had modified all the shortcuts to her browsers, adding the url to sweet-page to them and a whole string of other junk. Fixing the shortcuts also got rid of the pop-overs.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2014 03:01 |
|
eithedog posted:http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201309-201408
|
# ? Sep 10, 2014 03:09 |
|
North Korea lets foreign tourists connect to the real internet now. It's that and a few government workers.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2014 03:11 |
|
That makes a lot more sense then.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2014 03:13 |
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Yeah, W3Schools has always had weird usage rates compared to other sources. If I remember right, they had IE going below 50% several years ahead of when the majority of other stat sources did, which kinda indicates to me they might have an unrepresentative sample. Or that their sample doesn't include stolen copies of Windows, or something. I remember somebody pointed out a while back that the huge usage of Windows XP in China is driven by the fact that the vast majority of installations are unlicensed. Edit: Good point below. I'll stop talking out of my rear end now. Ynglaur fucked around with this message at 10:34 on Sep 10, 2014 |
# ? Sep 10, 2014 07:08 |
|
Ynglaur posted:Or that their sample doesn't include stolen copies of Windows, or something. I remember somebody pointed out a while back that the huge usage of Windows XP in China is driven by the fact that the vast majority of installations are unlicensed. This doesn't make sense, as there's no way to track that someone used stolen copies through browser headers.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2014 07:16 |
I reformatted a computer (customer's request) and when I reinstalled MSE it started going nuts telling me it's detecting Alureon on the system. I googled and apparently this poo poo creates hidden sectors to reinstall itself off of.
|
|
# ? Sep 10, 2014 18:45 |
|
President Ark posted:I reformatted a computer (customer's request) and when I reinstalled MSE it started going nuts telling me it's detecting Alureon on the system. I googled and apparently this poo poo creates hidden sectors to reinstall itself off of. Zero-fill drive, start over again. That poo poo is ugly.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2014 19:35 |
|
On the topic of old viruses, does anyone know if it's safe to install BonziBuddy now that all the servers are down?
|
# ? Sep 11, 2014 07:17 |
|
I have no experience with this sort of thing (thankfully) but I'm reading the thread out of interest. I'm wondering if the cryptolocker guys aren't easy to catch because they need to give you some sort of wiring information? Where do they want all the money for decryption wired to?
|
# ? Sep 11, 2014 12:17 |
|
b2n posted:I have no experience with this sort of thing (thankfully) but I'm reading the thread out of interest. Cryptolocker usually deals in Bitcoins.
|
# ? Sep 11, 2014 18:51 |
|
Forever_Peace posted:If changing their habits is truly hopeless, make them buy Sandboxie Pro and set all their browsers to auto run in sandboxes. This seems to be my best option. Let's say I sandbox a browser, will I be allowed to save my legitimate downloads to the hard disk?
|
# ? Sep 11, 2014 21:08 |
|
Drunk Badger posted:This seems to be my best option. Let's say I sandbox a browser, will I be allowed to save my legitimate downloads to the hard disk? Yea, a popup shows up for each browser download. The typical user will find NoScript/Sandboxie a hassle and/or the multiple layers confusing so I usually don't recommend those to everyone. Alabaster White posted:On the topic of old viruses, does anyone know if it's safe to install BonziBuddy now that all the servers are down? I'm not sure but you could install and test just about anything within Sandboxie temporarily to see what happens.
|
# ? Sep 11, 2014 21:42 |
|
Zogo posted:Yea, a popup shows up for each browser download. The typical user will find NoScript/Sandboxie a hassle and/or the multiple layers confusing so I usually don't recommend those to everyone. Then you need to charge a fee for every time you come clean viruses off their computer or something. My girlfriend is not really a technical person, but she eventually got the hang of NoScript. Make them go to a new website that uses scripts, make them push the buttons and armchair quarterback them on what looks like a scripts server or CDN and what looks like ads, and they will figure out the thought process pretty fast. It would be super awesome if there were some sort of community-ratings system for this task. Like a plugin that looks at the NoScript settings everyone is using for horsecockstube.com and sees which domains the collective hivemind is enabling. Then you can aggregate it on a web-wide level and see that no one actually needs googlemetrics.com for any site to work properly, and so on. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 01:08 on Sep 12, 2014 |
# ? Sep 12, 2014 01:05 |
|
whois posted:Whois I think you know what you need to do.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2014 02:30 |
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Then you need to charge a fee for every time you come clean viruses off their computer or something. It's what I do for a living so that's not an issue. Paul MaudDib posted:My girlfriend is not really a technical person, but she eventually got the hang of NoScript. Make them go to a new website that uses scripts, make them push the buttons and armchair quarterback them on what looks like a scripts server or CDN and what looks like ads, and they will figure out the thought process pretty fast. There are a lot of users out there that won't be persuaded or cajoled into that kind of task.
|
# ? Sep 13, 2014 05:01 |
|
Does anyone know if there is a way to remove Avast externally? Their rescue disk only does scans, and I'm pretty sure that is what is stopping this computer from booting. Flattening is the next option, but was wondering if there was something before that (And I really don't want to pull this goddamn harddrive out.)
|
# ? Sep 20, 2014 00:18 |
|
Gothmog1065 posted:Does anyone know if there is a way to remove Avast externally? Their rescue disk only does scans, and I'm pretty sure that is what is stopping this computer from booting. Flattening is the next option, but was wondering if there was something before that (And I really don't want to pull this goddamn harddrive out.) Have you tried a safe mode boot? What makes you sure that Avast is keeping it from booting?
|
# ? Sep 20, 2014 00:25 |
|
Neither mode will boot. It will lock up once it gets to the user selection screen on normal, and on safe mode it locks up at aswRvrt.sys, and everything I've seen from googling shows it's an avast issue. e: And yes, there were a few trojans, I think I got a good portion of them with a Kaspersky Rescue Disk.
|
# ? Sep 20, 2014 00:51 |
|
It's extreme but have you tried booting into recovery console and redoing bootrec or just deleting the avast stuff from there?
|
# ? Sep 20, 2014 01:02 |
|
Whew. Just got the go ahead to flatten and reinstall.
|
# ? Sep 20, 2014 01:09 |
|
So new 'exploit of the week': Shellshock affecting MacOSX and most flavours of Linux. Have you guys noticed any changes in remediation strategies now that vulns seem to have pr campaigns and dedicated web pages?
|
# ? Sep 25, 2014 21:01 |
|
Scaramouche posted:So new 'exploit of the week': Shellshock affecting MacOSX and most flavours of Linux. Have you guys noticed any changes in remediation strategies now that vulns seem to have pr campaigns and dedicated web pages? I think you should check out this thread since stuff is getting posted there about it once in a while. But to answer your question: the solution is to just update your Bash installation on any system that may be running Bash and to consult with any vendors. The biggest pain you might have may be any systems that have the console locked out. There are no sensible remediation steps other than that sadly.
|
# ? Sep 25, 2014 21:23 |
|
In lieu of an to date OP, what's the standard procedure for finding a relative's Win7 PC that's riddled with spyware and viruses and poo poo? Flattening and reinstalling ain't an option I'm afraid. Edit- just seen the sticky in the HoTS. Never mind, nothing to see here... Yoshimo fucked around with this message at 13:33 on Oct 6, 2014 |
# ? Oct 6, 2014 13:07 |
|
Any thoughts on Norton's product suite compared to ESET? Is there any meaningful difference for the average home user?
|
# ? Oct 9, 2014 06:52 |
|
Ynglaur posted:Any thoughts on Norton's product suite compared to ESET? Is there any meaningful difference for the average home user?
|
# ? Oct 9, 2014 14:38 |
|
Ynglaur posted:Any thoughts on Norton's product suite compared to ESET? Is there any meaningful difference for the average home user? Eset or Kaspersky are the only decent antiviruses. And just get the AV, not the suite. Do NOT get Norton or McAffee, they are terrible. I've fixed so many systems just by running the Norton removal tool. Its garbage.
|
# ? Oct 9, 2014 15:10 |
|
We've been using ESET for about 4 years and it really is the only thing I'd recommend to someone I liked.
|
# ? Oct 9, 2014 15:15 |
|
Thanks for the responses everyone.
|
# ? Oct 9, 2014 17:14 |
|
Siochain posted:Eset or Kaspersky are the only decent antiviruses. Yup, if you're going to pay money it should be one of these two. And if you watch Newegg/etc and are willing to float a rebate, you can often pick them up for almost nothing. I got a 3-seat 1-year license on Kaspersky Pure for either $0 or $5 (after $50 rebate), and I got a 1-seat ESET license for free after a $10 or $15 rebate or something along those lines.
|
# ? Oct 9, 2014 20:40 |
|
Someone in my family has a bunch of one-year cards for some Norton 360 garbage and required me to install it instead of something less awful and free (avast! is my usual choice for that). That poor laptop ground to a halt as soon as it finished installing.
|
# ? Oct 9, 2014 20:45 |
|
For the past couple days my browser was taking forever to load pages, turns out it was loading some tracking site called quantserve.com every time I clicked a link. Adding the site to adblock's filter fixed the loading times but searching for info on what might be causing it hasn't given me anything solid. e: Poetic Justice posted:Doesn't SA use quantserve? It shows up in Noscript for this site, but I keep it blocked because it does tend to cause browsing slowness. It is just an analytics/tracking cookie. For example, it provides invaluable information that the top interest on this site is videogames, and 90% of users are male. That's a relief. Don't know why it suddenly started hammering my loading speeds, I'll just leave it blocked now that it's doing that. super sweet best pal fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Oct 22, 2014 |
# ? Oct 21, 2014 20:42 |
|
https://www.malwarebytes.org Run that, see what pops up! Oh, and start your browser in safe mode if it's got one (All add-ins disabled) to see if there's a difference as well.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 21:12 |
|
Unguided posted:For the past couple days my browser was taking forever to load pages, turns out it was loading some tracking site called quantserve.com every time I clicked a link. Adding the site to adblock's filter fixed the loading times but searching for info on what might be causing it hasn't given me anything solid. Doesn't SA use quantserve? It shows up in Noscript for this site, but I keep it blocked because it does tend to cause browsing slowness. It is just an analytics/tracking cookie. For example, it provides invaluable information that the top interest on this site is videogames, and 90% of users are male. somethingawful bf fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Oct 21, 2014 |
# ? Oct 21, 2014 22:55 |
|
Poetic Justice posted:Doesn't SA use quantserve? It shows up in Noscript for this site, but I keep it blocked because it does tend to cause browsing slowness. It is just an analytics/tracking cookie. For example, it provides invaluable information that the top interest on this site is videogames, and 90% of users are male. I would have figured Food and Drink would have been higher, but that is some interesting information
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 00:41 |
|
Stanley Pain posted:Do you have one example of a in the wild, drive by, ad malware that can infect android without any user interaction? I'm being half snarky and half curious. As a side question, has anyone encountered, as Stan said, drive-by ad malware (like an advertisement on a web site), that can infect Mac OS X via Safari? (Yosemite or Mavericks) I've been curious about OS X malware/viruses, and my understanding is there aren't many, and they tend to be situations where someone gets a fake download (Flashback) or they are trojans piggybacking on pirated software. Three-Phase fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Oct 22, 2014 |
# ? Oct 22, 2014 00:52 |
|
Poetic Justice posted:Doesn't SA use quantserve? It shows up in Noscript for this site, but I keep it blocked because it does tend to cause browsing slowness. It is just an analytics/tracking cookie. For example, it provides invaluable information that the top interest on this site is videogames, and 90% of users are male. Amusingly, I had to enable scripts for quantcast.com to see the stats. (yes I know that's not really irony)
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 07:45 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 22:24 |
|
Three-Phase posted:As a side question, has anyone encountered, as Stan said, drive-by ad malware (like an advertisement on a web site), that can infect Mac OS X via Safari? (Yosemite or Mavericks) Good timing, because 'iWorm' has just become the latest high-profile one (though every bit of malware on an Apple platform gets over-hyped for clickbait; a false-positive detection on an i-frame in an app got bloggers claiming malware has made it to the iOS store). It seems to need user interaction, though. Flashback was distributed via a java exploit when it first hit, and required no user interaction to get infected. After java patches got pushed out it moved to social engineering. It seems Macs are getting targeted disproportionately as machines for botnets; I assume this is because the virus authors make the assumption there's no AV installed on many, vs a PC which even if it gets missed, might later remove it by a definitions update.
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 09:53 |