Regarding e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by enduser999, May 18, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    Well Nxx 2004 caught the goldun in this file but NOD32 still doesn't detect it even with the May 18th updates. I have to deal with people who click on attachments from people who they know even though I am blue in the face from telling them not too. I need to recommend anti-virus programs to these type of people. I am sorry to say the current trial version of NOD32 isn't one of them.
    :doubt:
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2005
  2. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    And next week it will be the reverse order on some file that Nxx 2004 misses. Eset prioritise their updates, those out and about in the masses receive first priority, next most prevalent is next in line, and so on and so on...

    I have sold hundreds and hundreds of copies of Nod32 to my clients and all I can say is that it works.

    Cheers :D
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2005
  3. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught


    How computer savy are your clients though? Do they click on unexpected attachments whether these attachments be from friends or strangers?
     
  4. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    Oh you bet your house they do, and with some you are never going to change that, in such instances Process Guard 3 is a very good preventative measure ;) :D

    Cheers :D
     
  5. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    Well I guess that I will have to disagree with that stance of having to use Process Guard 3 in order to prevent computers from becoming infected with known trojans. They would have to spend $39 USD for NOD32 + $29 USD for Process Guard 3 for a total of $68 USD or $85 CDN would be a hard sell for homeusers. They see other commerical anti-virus on store shelves for less than that here. As well Process Guard 3 on the surface confuse the heck out of a majority of my clients as well adding to the overhead that is already there in other commerical anti-virus products?
     
  6. mercurie

    mercurie A Friendly Creature

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    2,442
    Location:
    Sky over the Wilders Forest
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    Enduser999 and RealCybi,
    Welcome to the Wilders. I do not recall meeting either of you here. Glad to know you. :ninja: ;)
     
  7. beethoven

    beethoven Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Posts:
    1,043
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    Do these other programs catch 100% of every virus, Trojan, worm or Malware ? Can you be totally relaxed in the knowledge that your "user" will continue to click on any unknown file in abandon?
     
  8. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    I didn’t say that at all, I said “Nod32 works”, in fact it works really well, period. However, for some users, typically teenagers and people that are “click happy”, NO anti-virus will be enough. The next step up is Process Guard 3. It is very SIMPLE to use, if my Aunt and Uncle can use it (after having multiple spyware infections install themselves), absolutely anyone can, without a single doubt, and I know so, because I install it on home PC’s.


    A very small price to pay for protection of a $2000 piece of equipment, and certainly less than having to pay for their data to be backed up and have Windows reinstalled and all their programs. I prefer to get to them before the accident, than after it.

    It comes down to confidence in what you are selling. I have no problem whatsoever selling a system with Nod32, Acronis True Image, Process Guard 3, Regedefend, and CounterSpy, all at RRP. The public have had a gutful on continually being reinfected with rubbish.


    And yet again I had another (new) customer in with teenagers, and a fully infected system, for the 3rd time around. She had purchased a system without a Windows Disk, had Norton on it, became infected, paid some cowboy over $400 to clean her system, got infected again, went to the local chain store, bought McAfee at $110, couldn’t clean her system. A friend of hers then recommend my company. She needed a reinstall of Windows, so had to purchase a copy, and we are reinstalling her McAfee, Process Guard 3 and CounterSpy. She too has had enough.


    Both comments addressed above.

    If you want to continue discussing this, I will have to split these posts off into another forum, as we are on the "Nod32 Support Forum".

    Let me know.

    Cheers :D
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2005
  9. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    Oh my goodness. $400? Even in AU Dollars its quite a bit I think :eek::eek::eek:

    and $110 for McAfee?

    Good thing she came to your shop, Blackspear! :)

    But did she clean the remnants of Norton after uninstall? I ask because it can cause problems if not....
     
  10. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    Please do as I have had a less than flattering experience with CounterSpy.
     
  11. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    No not unless the developers for the other programs have released updates for the virus/trojan. However trying to explain to the clients why they need to spend more additional monies on another product,Process Guard 3, to protect them from the nasties, that their AntiVirus product in their thinking is going to be a hard sell. I haven't had the time to even try the 30 day version of Process Guard 3 so what makes it better and worth the cost of free registry monitors such as Tea Timer (SpyBot) and WinPatrol whoch both monitor registry changes?
     
  12. beethoven

    beethoven Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Posts:
    1,043
    Re: e-gold message with apparent trojan not caught

    But that's the point - your clients have to understand that no AV is fail safe as no AV provider will always have all definitions. Logically, there have to be some infections before definitions will be created meaning someone gets caught :(

    So you only get better/ safer outcomes by behavioural changes and/or a combination of programs. As to the benefit of PG3, I haven't used it yet. I am sure others are more qualified to do so anyway ;)
     
  13. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    This thread is a split-off discussion which originated here

    Blue
     
  14. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
    This was originally posted in the following thread

    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=467143#post467143

    Update: I am still hesitate with purchasing NOD32 and using it as my main antivirus. The reason is that it is the only AntiVirus program that has caused a fair amount of frustration with it interferring with my Email program Eudora and Azureus. As it stands now I am using an older version of Azureus and can not update to the current version as NOD32 will cause my system to come to its knees.

    I have used several anti-virus applications over the years that I have been dealing with computers and NOD is the first one that had this severe of an affect on my computer.

    :(
     
  15. You may want to give Bitdefender a try...NOD on my system dragged surfing to
    a crawl...BD scans about 10-11 minutes faster than the last NOD beta.
    It's about 10 dollars cheaper than NOD ...also has a registry protector that
    works as good as prevx against reg test by Ghost.
    It updates several times a day...and is now has 169710 definitions.
     
  16. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
  17. That was about 70,000 definitions ago...Give it a try...who knows, maybe
    faster now.
     
  18. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
    Well BitDefender track record at VirusBtn is 7 passes and 6 failures over the period that VirusBtn has been testing the product.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.