Quick, few days left

Maybe fin_jore you could double click blue monitor on task bar and open it up > scan> infection treatment> you have choices report- delete- rename- move file - cure file (it is set to cure file by default)
also do the same with the scanner options >right click blue monitor> launch e Trust anti virus> scanner > local scanner options
there is the alert options also there under local scanner options which you might be able to suss out and read up . I havent done so as yet .
hope this helps
It is a sweet anti virus thats for sure and I think by the time we all suss it out we shall be very comfortable with it

 

Turn on the messenger service to receive alerts or check the log.

 

Thanx solarpowered candle and RAV !

>Maybe fin_jore you could double click blue monitor on >task bar and open it up > scan> infection treatment> >you have choices report- delete- rename- move >file - cure file (it is set to cure file by default)

Already tryed this, no help.

>Turn on the messenger service to receive alerts or >check the log.
Yes, I think this do the trick but I leave it 'Off ' because
this :
http://www.fileheaven.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7068&sid=87674d3b2d658e0fa3094bd0e2436e3b

I check the log. Thanx guys !

 

Me = RedhatCOC on dslr

Yup, it corrupted me NTFS partition, I have since had to zero the HD (which took.... 17/18 hours) as i couldn't fdisk or use my manufacturors system recovery even.

Just don't click the option concerning NTFS in the configuration, and all should be fine. Im on KAV now, great little buy

 

anyone facing problems with the mouse after installing this AV?
My mouse cursor keeps freezing, disappearing and reappearing again !
or is it just a coincidence ? !!

 

I haven't had a single problem with this AV, other than that it refuses to automatically download which doesn't concern me at all.

It seems to integrate nicely with my Win XP and my hard drive formatted to NTFS. Wish I could be more help. I haven't read of anyone having that sort of problem anywhere I've looked concerning this version of ETrust.

 

which is more reliable, Avast 4 or ETrust AV ?

 

That's a good question, minacross. Both, in my opinion, are very good AVs. I've used Avast4 and didn't feel undergunned at all. I never had the opportunity to see it snag a virus, but I've only had 2 virus attacks in almost 7 yrs online.

I'll go out on a limb and say that this server version of ETrust might be the better option. It has 2 scanning engines, InoculateIT and Vet. I have one set for online activity and when I'm using the computer for work. The other I use for my daily or every other day regular virus scan. ETrust scans fast, so I've been doing a regular scan daily of late.

All that said, if this weren't available, I'd probably be with the free version of Avast4 again. I was using PCCillin prior to seeing the post about Etrust here.

 

I downloaded this when it was first posted here and like it so far. Except that it wouldn't download the updates automatically. So I was going to the CA site to download them manually.

I've been using the trial version LooknStop and the time ran out so I uninstalled it but my Sygate file was messed up somehow so I had to run naked for a little while during the download. Yes I know you don't need to say anything about stupidity!

Lo and behold the definitions started automatically downloading with no problems while I had no firewall.

I had tried to figure it out for a month now and never could figure out why it wasn't downloading. The firewall didn't seem to be stopping it but I didn't know for sure.

So maybe we need to come up with a rule that will work with the autodownloads because it's definitely, at least in my case, the firewall.

 

Works even on Win98! GREAT!!!
Thanks.

 

http://etrustantivirus.ca.com.

get the trial version here.

extract both the promotional and trial version with winrar and replace the xxxxx (aginst TOS)from the trial with the one from promotional.

autoupdate will work and find the right files for win 98/2000/xp.

for alerts you must have the messenger service running ( xp )

 

sorry for the breach of TOS.

got a bit carried away.

won't happen again.

regards,pete.

 

No Problem ,Pete!


tECHNODROME

 

Well I did some quick test and threw some Worms on next AVs:

AVAST 4
AVG 7
eTrust 7
F-Prot 3.14
NOD32 2.0
McAfee 7
KAV 4.5
QuickHeal
SOPHOS

eTrust won 3rd place.



tECHNODROME

 

Step-By-Step: Set Antivirus Software for Maximum Protection

Activate crucial settings to ensure that your system is completely protected.
these settings for optimising your e Trust anti virus for the best protection can be found at http://my-etrust.com/news/pressreleasedetails.cfm?pressReleaseID=16
click on PC World: Step-By-Step
View Press Release
worth a check for those who may be utilising the version 7

 

156 users comments on e trust anti virus ( these are b4 the new release of the promo which now also has Vet with it , of course). http://reviews.cnet.com/4852-3514_7-8009367.html?legacy=cnet&tag=st.sw.806174-1204-8009367.urev.806174-1218-8009367

 

From the Cnet test:

It's seems that an in memory simulated virus that was not discovered is bad Well done I'd say

 

I have my doubts about simulations (and CNET ), and as we are using eTrust at the moment I can say we are very pleased with it

 

Iv been running it alongside the E Trust firewall , which is very tidy too.

 

Can anyone state which of the 2 engines is the better?

I thought that the VET engine was the best as it has a very good recent record at Virus bulletin, whereas the Inoculate engine seems to perform 'poorly' in comparison.

However, some recent posts I have seen ( cannot put my fingers on them at present) say that the Inoculate engine was the better of the two.

Those of you using this AV, which engine do you use in the RTM?

I have loaded it up on one of my machines here and I am going to give it a trial.

 

Inoculate engine performs better on malware (i.e. Backdoor, Trojans) where Vet is better with ITW and polymoric detection.


tECHNODROME

 

Would therefore be difficult to decide which would be the better of the 2 engines for use in the RTM?

Maybe Vet for the RTM and the Inoculate engine for the on demand scanner? .

Yet from what I can see CA Associates/Etrust seem to be pushing the Inoculate engine as this is the default.

Any views on this?

 

They (computer associates) seem to recommend the inoculate and it comes with that in default . I use both scanners when i do full scan - as the scans are pretty fast -and both take around the same time to run a scan. I also alternate my realmon with inoculate one day and Vet the next . I really like this one and are gonna run with it and see .
I have freinds in Australia who swear by Vet and wouldnt touch anything else if you gave it too them . Its quite expensive to purchase Vet on its own ) I look foreward to your experiences and observations Blackcat
Thats good info Technodrome regarding the abilities of each ty

 

I use Vet for the realtime scan and Inocutate for the local scan option as of tonight. Last week, I had them reversed. I switch every week or so just because, I don't know, it seems like the thing to do. I'm very happy with this AV and am going to stick with it and want to thank the person who posted about it. It's a great AV.

 

It was meneer who brouight this to our attention