I do not think all has been said regarding TDS-3

I guess it may be a case of "ask and you shall recieve"?.I cant tell you what i recieved (unless its PE or PG as these posts are not removed) , however i didnt recieve either of those
ellison

 

I totally agree with this...............most eveyone, there are very few exceptions, that i speak with, no nothing more then .......get an anti-virus program(and those don't seem at all concerned about updates) and turn the anti-popup on......these people are average people .....IMO

 

That is completely false. How many people did they poll? 5,000? 10,000? Certainly not the entire planet. Polls like that are useless. All you have to do is look around you. Your family, friends, and friends of friends. They all have a virus scanner, and maybe a pop-up blocker, but that doesn't make them security experts. Majority of people using computers still do not know what the heck they're doing. Maybe 10 or 20 years from now...

No offense, but that article is worthless.

 

Hey T2K.....we have great timing........wanna start a band

 

Yeah, that was pretty funny. We wrote the same exact thing at the same exact time...

 

Yeah, I agree.. there are still lots and lots of users that don't know anything more than "antivirus and/or firewall" ..and if you look around at other forums you can easily find people that are pretty hostile about the idea of anything else, because they "know security" and that's all you need! (most of them will also tell you just how effective their software is because it detects things often, and they end up having to disinfect.) Last figure I saw was that something like 40% of users don't even use an AV or FW, although they can still tell you that 'that's security'.. just as most people know better than to open unknown email, but how many actually practice that is a different story. My girlfriend's mom knows better than to open unknown email, but still gets confused by right-click vs left-click, and an AV, FW, and anything besides IE are out of the question (luckily they're behind a NAT, and I installed an AV anyway).. knowing these things isn't the same as knowing computers or security.

 

SmartSniff, in order to fully functional, requires the installation of WinPcap (http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/smsniff.html#problems). Even with WinPcap installed, SmartSniff has no feature comparable to Socket Spy.

 

I should have been more specific. Yes, you need WinPcap (free) to enable all features of SmartSniff, but the program itself does not require installation.

The sniffer in PE may be a little more advanced (specifically, it's Socket Spy), but the point I was making is that PE is a program that about 1 person out of 1 million will truly need and/or use. Who in their right mind would sit there and watch packets fly back and forth for entertainment anyway? Unless someone is a web site administrator or something similar, PE is basically useless for the general public.

Also, CurrPorts (or any major firewall) shows what programs/files are connecting and, if you do suspect that something weird is going in or out, SmartSniff does the job just fine to let you figure out what that is. For FREE.

PE is a quality program (for a very limited audience), but there are good alternatives out there. I also think that PE is overpriced for what it is. I wouldn't price it any higher than $9.95.

 

"A survey of US Web users by the Pew Internet and American Life Project released this month shows 91 percent have changed the way they behave online as they try to avoid these problems. "

Changed behavior probably means getting a firewall and AV.

I doubt 91% of people start using Diamond products like Process Guard.

 

It's a very old test, before even Wormguard existed.

One of them for example, was simply sending some script together with the email.

There are several different ways to counter such tests, some people like the ISP to filter for them , some AVs might pick it up (even though it's based on a very dumb test) etc, while for the vast majority, the email is perfectly harmless because of their email client

I certainly don't think justifying WG based on this is useful.

 

Probably 75% of the 91% don't realise they have to update their AV definitions.

 

Hi Hammer,

Everyone I ever met or talked to knew about Anti-virus and how to update. What many didn't realize were these two points:

1) How porous some of the AVs were (even with updated databases)
2) That the root cause was Microsoft's design of Windows

Theft on the Internet is very well understood at this point, and as the article suggests, many users are changing their Internet purchasing and financial habits because of the very well publicized problems. I know this, because I talk to lots of people. The article verifies my own personal experiences. Even ZoneAlarm is now including program blocks in order to try to stem the problems. Time will tell whether users will find this approach acceptable.

Regards,
Rich

 

From what i perceived to be a top-notch software company was dashed with the way DCS handled the termination of TDS-3. I am not saying that they are not top notch at writing security programs but that my trust level of how they handled their customers with the termination of TDS-3 has taken two steps (or more) back from what i previously felt. My gut feeling here is a feeling of being somehow betrayed which will affect how i view this company for some time in the future.
Although I feel taken aback somewhat by this company now I wish them well with their future software releases.

 

I want to update the forum members that are still interested about the legal issues involved here. I contacted the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) regarding Diamond Computer Systems Pty Ltd. After speaking with Patrick he led me to the Trade Practices Act which is the governing "statute," if you may. It seems that under Part IV B & V you see the following sections:
Section 52: Very broad provision governing misleading or deceptive conduct
Section 51A: Covers misleading representations about the future supply and use of goods and services
Section 56: Talks about "bait advertising," however, I don't think it applies to this case.
Section 58: Accepting payment without intending to supply

Do I think that DCS is guilty of violating all of these provisions, no. Do I think that they are not guilty and in compliance on every one...we'll see. In the meantime here is the Act in it's entirety (You be the judge ):

Trade Practices Act

 

LMAO good lord man don't you have anything else to do like wash the car or brush your teeth? This is ridiculous - I'd tell you to stop but these actions on your part are rather entertaining to say the very least. Hey when you win the big bucks let's have a party 'k :-D

 

It was funny when it first started, but now it's just sad. (Please, someone get that guy a girlfriend! )

 

I seem to remember something about not needing TDS4 anyway...

 

You never know when to stop huh Dallen?
You go very very wrong with this one "without intending to supply"
as you know very well how is the reality, as we beta team have been testing parts of the stuff and you are using part of the technologies especially developed and invented for the TDS-4 generation.
So call some master program TDS-4 generation, add ProcessGuard and the other standalone goodies as modules to it (compare with what Jason is building with his security suite) and you have your TDS-4 even though it looks a bit different of what we expected.
You knew from the first moment Wayne and team spoke of two or three elements belonging to that generation, so we are using it since long, and more to follow.

Once you're so good in searching law and criminal law, please produce the articles about gossip and intentionally blackpainting, creating an untrue atmosphere especially on a frequent base, with only goal seriously damaging a company. I think there are articles about smartmoney and other preventive laws to avoid any further damage.

 

Sueing or any legal action is the farthest thing from my mind. DCS is a great company and makes good products why would anyone want to see that stopped? Well all I can say is I`m not one of them. I`ve got over the way this was handled, it was just bad PR...nothing more. You guys go Wayne and Co., more power to ya.

 

... and they helped growing ME into what i am in this field now.
(see lightblue link in my sig).

 

By developing you they've saved themselves heaps on hiring tech support staff. Developing you was more doing themselves a very big favour and saving themselves a lot of time and money than giving you an education.

If someone helped my business out as much as you help out DCS I would put them on my payroll and pay them a very good wage.

I think it is very unfair if Jooske is not given very substantial rewards and payment for all she does. If DCS is really a fair company they should pay Jooske because there is just so much one can take for free without beginning to look like they are just exploiting people's kindness.

All of you who think Jooske should be paid for all the work she does put your hand up.

Dave

 

The world is even worse Worldcitizen:
You are helping people out (and in) even without a title of Moderator! Wow all that permanent education all for free! As long as our systems are fine and data secured and safe, that's what it is about here. Using all the DiamondCS gems where possible (= products and team's info).

 

Jooske. DCS and everyone on this forum owe very much thanks to you for all the time you give to help others

Dave

 

Agreed