Attack Launched within Minutes of Signing on for First Time ...

[W. Watson]

All this attention to virus and firewall protection is interesting, but I
wish someone would comment on the mechanism of the attack. That is, the
virus or whatever that detected the smtp problem. I have my doubts that it
actually invaded his machine. To me it seemed more like a pop-up, since it
asked the user to modify the registry.

Richard Urban wrote:
> Not the free version, last time I installed it on a computer.
>

--
Wayne Watson (Nevada City, CA)

Web Page: <speckledwithStars.net>

 

[Jim]

"W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:ezFui.27130$RX.2840@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net...
> All this attention to virus and firewall protection is interesting, but I
> wish someone would comment on the mechanism of the attack. That is, the
> virus or whatever that detected the smtp problem. I have my doubts that it
> actually invaded his machine. To me it seemed more like a pop-up, since it
> asked the user to modify the registry.
>
> Richard Urban wrote:
>> Not the free version, last time I installed it on a computer.
>>
>
> --
> Wayne Watson (Nevada City, CA)
>
> Web Page: <speckledwithStars.net>
The mechanism is quite simple. The hacker creates a virus installer which
tries to download the software on all computers.
In most instances, the hacker does not try to attack from a single source.
The end result is that only those computers with inadequte protection get
invaded. Examples abound of computers being
infected during OS installation at this time, the computer has no
protection from abusive tactics.

It may be that this particular attack did cause execution of a pop up on the
subject computer. While most of the code resides
elsewhere, some small piece of code must execute on the target machine to
broadcast the message.
If so, this is just another method of social engineering. I. e. the hacker
takes advantage of the user's lack of knowledge
and enlists the user to be the hacker's accomlice.
Jim

 

[LadyDungeness@Fish.Net]

YES. The Free version of AVG will update automatically. I AM USING
IT RIGHT NOW.


Lady Dungeness
Crabby, but Great Legs!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 09:34:51 -0400, "Richard Urban"
<richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:

|Not the free version, last time I installed it on a computer.

 

[Kerry Brown]

"W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:ezFui.27130$RX.2840@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net...
> All this attention to virus and firewall protection is interesting, but I
> wish someone would comment on the mechanism of the attack. That is, the
> virus or whatever that detected the smtp problem. I have my doubts that it
> actually invaded his machine. To me it seemed more like a pop-up, since it
> asked the user to modify the registry.
>


It was most likely messenger service spam.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="messenger+service"+spam&meta=

This is irrelevant to the problem though. The fact that you received these
spam messages is an indication that you do not have proper security in
place. It is very likely that an Internet worm has also infected the
computer if it is this open. I have seen pc's infected before Windows is
finished installing if they have a live Internet connection and no firewall.
A Windows pc without a firewall that is directly exposed to the Internet
won't last longer than a couple of minutes. With Windows 2000 and a dialup
connection it is imperative that you install some firewall software before
you connect to the Internet. Simply disabling the messenger service will
stop this spam but this offers no protection from worms.

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
http://www.vistahelp.ca

 

[W. Watson]

One other thought on this. As part of his training wheels period,I plan to
attack his computer myself to test his ability to deal with attacks. The
"attacks" will be simple disguised sender messages that will ask him to
download files or maybe respond to some bogus advertisement that I concoct.

BoaterDave wrote:
> Just thought I'd say Hi - and thank you for helping others in the way you
> have described, Wayne.
>
> I do think that on this occasion Malke was rather unkind in her (I believe)
> comment, but it was understanderble too. As you've now noted, a great deal
> has changed on the 'net since 9/11 and in the past couple of years in
> particular! Spyware is now considered as much a risk as viruses, so don't
> forget to use an anti-spyware programme too!
>
> David
>
> ***********************************************************************************
>
>
> "W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:aa0ui.47742$YL5.44511@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>> My 91 year old neighbor has been using a Win98 PC on and off for several
>> years for communicating with his relatives. His old PC just can't hack it
>> any more, s/w and h/w wise. His relatives and grandchildren sometimes want
>> to use it when they visit him. He would like to jump to DSL at some point.
>> It's as cheap as the dial-up he's on.
>>
>> I'm putting him on training wheels until he proves he can handle and use
>> w2k. If he wants to extend his reach beyond e-mail, it will be to use
>> Google. If he screws up the computer, I can wipe it all out and re-install
>> w2k in 30 minutes with an e-mail and browser (not MS). This guy is no
>> dummy at 91. His limitations are more physical than mental. One can also
>> think of a competition for him. He's proud that he can operate a PC at his
>> age, and demonstrates that pride to the older people he knows and his
>> relatives. He'll do just fine. He does not linger in the past. This is not
>> so much about technology as it is about the mind. If he wants DSL, I'll
>> install it for him, but first we go on training wheels.
>>
>> Gerry (The MOTH) wrote:
>>> "Malke" <notreally@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:uEVGz7O2HHA.6128@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> ...
>>> I helped a neighbour out a few months ago when her new PC wasn't working,
>>> she'd got a family friend to setup the system and he had told her you
>>> didn't need a firewall, Anti-Virus or Anti-Spyware for Windows Vista it
>>> was just a waste of money. Luck for her the Vista firewall was set on as
>>> default.
>>>
>>> Some, in fact most people are PC Dummies. Even when you sit them down and
>>> explain to them about it, they just ignore you. Classic example the
>>> Bro-In-Law, I setup his new laptop with ZoneAlarm, AVG, Spybot,
>>> SpyBlaster, Firefox, etc.. Told him if he was downloading anything from
>>> the internet to check it before he opened it, one month later he said his
>>> PC was slow and when i said have you been virus checking everything you
>>> download he said yes apart from music via Limewire (I didn't install that
>>> crap for him), he thought he didn't need to check that. Where did he
>>> think it came from?
>>> I left him to it as I wasn't spending hours trying to sort this problems.
>>>
>> --
>> Wayne Watson (Nevada City, CA)
>>
>> Web Page: <speckledwithStars.net>
>
>

--
Wayne Watson (Nevada City, CA)

Web Page: <speckledwithStars.net>

 

[Richard Urban]

OK. You seem to be correct and I am wrong here. I just installed it for the
first time in a year and after much digging it seems to update every 24
hours.

Not frequent enough in my book though.


--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)


<LadyDungeness@Fish.Net> wrote in message
news:e4amb3p468cjk50eucrrugncfhpe3chuma@4ax.com...
> YES. The Free version of AVG will update automatically. I AM USING
> IT RIGHT NOW.
>
>
> Lady Dungeness
> Crabby, but Great Legs!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
> On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 09:34:51 -0400, "Richard Urban"
> <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> |Not the free version, last time I installed it on a computer.

 

[LadyDungeness@Fish.Net]

Hi Richard,
Thank you for responding and confirming that I was right. -) It's
fine if you're still not satisfied with AVG *free*. Once a day is
enough for me and lots of others. I do have a cable connection now,
but it has a little button so I can turn it off when I'm not online I
can also use my handy *free* Zone Alarm program and shut down all
internet traffic, too.

If you're online a lot, or have a lot of computers on the same online
thingy, then I can see why you would want automatic updates more
often. So it makes sense for you to spend $$$ for a program that will
update more frequently.

For the user described here -- a single older man with one computer --
I should think FREE ZONE ALARM and FREE AVG ANTIVIRUS would be more
than adequate.


Lady Dungeness
Crabby, but Great Legs!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 23:04:08 -0400, "Richard Urban"
<richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:

|OK. You seem to be correct and I am wrong here. I just installed it for the
|first time in a year and after much digging it seems to update every 24
|hours.
|
|Not frequent enough in my book though.

 

[LadyDungeness@Fish.Net]

You are SICK! SICK SICK SICK


Lady Dungeness
Crabby, but Great Legs!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 15:27:34 GMT, "W. Watson"
<wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote:

|One other thought on this. As part of his training wheels period,I plan to
|attack his computer myself to test his ability to deal with attacks. The
|"attacks" will be simple disguised sender messages that will ask him to
|download files or maybe respond to some bogus advertisement that I concoct.
|
|BoaterDave wrote:
|> Just thought I'd say Hi - and thank you for helping others in the way you
|> have described, Wayne.
|>
|> I do think that on this occasion Malke was rather unkind in her (I believe)
|> comment, but it was understanderble too. As you've now noted, a great deal
|> has changed on the 'net since 9/11 and in the past couple of years in
|> particular! Spyware is now considered as much a risk as viruses, so don't
|> forget to use an anti-spyware programme too!
|>
|> David
|>
|> ***********************************************************************************
|>
|>
|> "W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
|> news:aa0ui.47742$YL5.44511@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
|>> My 91 year old neighbor has been using a Win98 PC on and off for several
|>> years for communicating with his relatives. His old PC just can't hack it
|>> any more, s/w and h/w wise. His relatives and grandchildren sometimes want
|>> to use it when they visit him. He would like to jump to DSL at some point.
|>> It's as cheap as the dial-up he's on.
|>>
|>> I'm putting him on training wheels until he proves he can handle and use
|>> w2k. If he wants to extend his reach beyond e-mail, it will be to use
|>> Google. If he screws up the computer, I can wipe it all out and re-install
|>> w2k in 30 minutes with an e-mail and browser (not MS). This guy is no
|>> dummy at 91. His limitations are more physical than mental. One can also
|>> think of a competition for him. He's proud that he can operate a PC at his
|>> age, and demonstrates that pride to the older people he knows and his
|>> relatives. He'll do just fine. He does not linger in the past. This is not
|>> so much about technology as it is about the mind. If he wants DSL, I'll
|>> install it for him, but first we go on training wheels.
|>>
|>> Gerry (The MOTH) wrote:
|>>> "Malke" <notreally@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
|>>> news:uEVGz7O2HHA.6128@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
|>> ...
|>>> I helped a neighbour out a few months ago when her new PC wasn't working,
|>>> she'd got a family friend to setup the system and he had told her you
|>>> didn't need a firewall, Anti-Virus or Anti-Spyware for Windows Vista it
|>>> was just a waste of money. Luck for her the Vista firewall was set on as
|>>> default.
|>>>
|>>> Some, in fact most people are PC Dummies. Even when you sit them down and
|>>> explain to them about it, they just ignore you. Classic example the
|>>> Bro-In-Law, I setup his new laptop with ZoneAlarm, AVG, Spybot,
|>>> SpyBlaster, Firefox, etc.. Told him if he was downloading anything from
|>>> the internet to check it before he opened it, one month later he said his
|>>> PC was slow and when i said have you been virus checking everything you
|>>> download he said yes apart from music via Limewire (I didn't install that
|>>> crap for him), he thought he didn't need to check that. Where did he
|>>> think it came from?
|>>> I left him to it as I wasn't spending hours trying to sort this problems.
|>>>
|>> --
|>> Wayne Watson (Nevada City, CA)
|>>
|>> Web Page: <speckledwithStars.net>
|>
|>

 

[BoaterDave]

It is a matter of opinion, My Lady!

*I* think that it's a good idea! <g>

David
**************************
<LadyDungeness@Fish.Net> wrote in message
news:bdqqb3tb3piedf0cbc2k34gc2j0e4j77a2@4ax.com...
> You are SICK! SICK SICK SICK
>
>
> Lady Dungeness
> Crabby, but Great Legs!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
> On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 15:27:34 GMT, "W. Watson"
> <wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote:
>
> |One other thought on this. As part of his training wheels period,I plan
> to
> |attack his computer myself to test his ability to deal with attacks. The
> |"attacks" will be simple disguised sender messages that will ask him to
> |download files or maybe respond to some bogus advertisement that I
> concoct.
> |
> |BoaterDave wrote:
> |> Just thought I'd say Hi - and thank you for helping others in the way
> you
> |> have described, Wayne.
> |>
> |> I do think that on this occasion Malke was rather unkind in her (I
> believe)
> |> comment, but it was understanderble too. As you've now noted, a great
> deal
> |> has changed on the 'net since 9/11 and in the past couple of years in
> |> particular! Spyware is now considered as much a risk as viruses, so
> don't
> |> forget to use an anti-spyware programme too!
> |>
> |> David
> |>
> |>
> ***********************************************************************************
> |>
> |>
> |> "W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
> |> news:aa0ui.47742$YL5.44511@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
> |>> My 91 year old neighbor has been using a Win98 PC on and off for
> several
> |>> years for communicating with his relatives. His old PC just can't hack
> it
> |>> any more, s/w and h/w wise. His relatives and grandchildren sometimes
> want
> |>> to use it when they visit him. He would like to jump to DSL at some
> point.
> |>> It's as cheap as the dial-up he's on.
> |>>
> |>> I'm putting him on training wheels until he proves he can handle and
> use
> |>> w2k. If he wants to extend his reach beyond e-mail, it will be to use
> |>> Google. If he screws up the computer, I can wipe it all out and
> re-install
> |>> w2k in 30 minutes with an e-mail and browser (not MS). This guy is no
> |>> dummy at 91. His limitations are more physical than mental. One can
> also
> |>> think of a competition for him. He's proud that he can operate a PC at
> his
> |>> age, and demonstrates that pride to the older people he knows and his
> |>> relatives. He'll do just fine. He does not linger in the past. This is
> not
> |>> so much about technology as it is about the mind. If he wants DSL,
> I'll
> |>> install it for him, but first we go on training wheels.
> |>>
> |>> Gerry (The MOTH) wrote:
> |>>> "Malke" <notreally@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> |>>> news:uEVGz7O2HHA.6128@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> |>> ...
> |>>> I helped a neighbour out a few months ago when her new PC wasn't
> working,
> |>>> she'd got a family friend to setup the system and he had told her you
> |>>> didn't need a firewall, Anti-Virus or Anti-Spyware for Windows Vista
> it
> |>>> was just a waste of money. Luck for her the Vista firewall was set on
> as
> |>>> default.
> |>>>
> |>>> Some, in fact most people are PC Dummies. Even when you sit them down
> and
> |>>> explain to them about it, they just ignore you. Classic example the
> |>>> Bro-In-Law, I setup his new laptop with ZoneAlarm, AVG, Spybot,
> |>>> SpyBlaster, Firefox, etc.. Told him if he was downloading anything
> from
> |>>> the internet to check it before he opened it, one month later he said
> his
> |>>> PC was slow and when i said have you been virus checking everything
> you
> |>>> download he said yes apart from music via Limewire (I didn't install
> that
> |>>> crap for him), he thought he didn't need to check that. Where did he
> |>>> think it came from?
> |>>> I left him to it as I wasn't spending hours trying to sort this
> problems.
> |>>>
> |>> --
> |>> Wayne Watson (Nevada City, CA)
> |>>
> |>> Web Page: <speckledwithStars.net>
> |>
> |>

 

[Andrew Taylor]

that is so lame to be ineffective and how will you check if he did it?

--
Andrew Taylor
Toronto - Canada
~

"W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:GnGui.56759$5j1.13690@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
> One other thought on this. As part of his training wheels period,I plan to
> attack his computer myself to test his ability to deal with attacks. The
> "attacks" will be simple disguised sender messages that will ask him to
> download files or maybe respond to some bogus advertisement that I
> concoct.
>

 

[BoaterDave]

Hello Andrew! Good to see you here.

However, I suspect that you've forgotten the time when *you* started
'computing', failed to read the whole of this thread and thus missed the
whole point of Wayne's teaching experiment. <g>

My take on this (which could, I admit, be incorrect) is that Wayne will not
send *real* malware to his elderly neighbour. He'll simply disguise his own
personal details (which I hadn't realised one could do until 2 years ago!)
and then send 'spoof' messages to show his neighbour that he must be careful
what he opens and that it's imprudent to click on a link in an email message
(or, similarly, in a newsgroup message).

How can he check, you ask! Well, he'll probably just pop in to see him and,
over a coffee and/or beer, ask what the old fellow did on receipt of said
message(s) whilst, probably, siting beside him in front of his PC screen.
How do I know this? I have helped my neighbours too! <g>

David

***************************************************************************************************
"Andrew Taylor" <andrewcrumplehorn@spamcopSUBVERSIVE.com> wrote in message
news:46be65e4$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...
> that is so lame to be ineffective and how will you check if he did it?
>
> --
> Andrew Taylor
> Toronto - Canada
> ~
>
> "W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:GnGui.56759$5j1.13690@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
>> One other thought on this. As part of his training wheels period,I plan
>> to attack his computer myself to test his ability to deal with attacks.
>> The "attacks" will be simple disguised sender messages that will ask him
>> to download files or maybe respond to some bogus advertisement that I
>> concoct.
>>
>

 

[cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)]

On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 08:02:07 -0700, "W. Watson"

>He can only afford a P3 at this stage. XP and Vista would overburden the
>computer. Vista would likely be a disaster for him.

Agreed. IMO, he'd be better off on WinME than Win2000 if on dial-up,
using a PC that is short of XP requirements.

XP and Win2000 are closer in requirements (especially RAM) than
Win2000 and WinME. A PC that is "too small" to run XP at all is
likely to be a slog in Win2000, and fine in WinME.

Dial-up is actually quite dangerous, when it comes to direct network
attacks, because the ISP's Internet-reachable address is bound
directly to the PC, without any NAT router protection.

So you have the worst of both worlds exposure to direct attack, plus
bandwidth that is too lame to "just" patch a lame OS.

The off-CD Win2000 code base is a death-trap, under such
circumstances no built-in firewall, which exposes RPC and LSASS
surfaces that are exploitable by Lovesan/Blaster and Sasser styles of
attack (as still used by many malware bots).

In contrast, WinME doesn't wave such surfaces at the Internet, and is
thus in this critical respect the safer OS. You can download the
latest Firefox and use that instead of IE, and download a decent email
app that is set not to use IE to render "message text" these steps
are required because every sub-XP bundled version of IE is a potential
death-trap due to this bug:

http://cquirke.mvps.org/9x/mimehole.htm

Unless you have SPs, IE6 SP1, patches for RPC and LSASS, and a
3rd-party firewall available on CD to install into Win2000 *before*
ever taking that online, I'd walk briskly away from that OS,
especially in the context of dial-up Internet access.

>Gerry (The MOTH) wrote:
>> "W. Watson" <wolf_tracks@invalid.com> wrote in message

>>> Well, life is grim out there on the internet. I built an elderly friend a
>>> PC with W2k on it and finally got his modem working.

<predictable train-wreck snipped>

>>> Any suggestions for a firewall?

Kerio, Outpost, Sygate ... dunno which are still free.

How much RAM does the PC have?

If 64M or less, go WinME (preferred to Win98SE as it has better USB
support for flash drives, camera card readers etc.).

If 128M, it's a judgement call between WinME and XP, unless on-board
graphics eats 32M to leave you with 96M (you can usually scale that
back to 4M in CMOS Setup).

If 256M+, I'd go XP SP2 rather than Win2000 or WinME.

The PIII-ness is prolly a non-issue, even at the 450MHz end of the
spectrum. If it's 850MHz Celeron or better, should be fine.



>--------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - -
Tech Support: The guys who follow the
'Parade of New Products' with a shovel.
>--------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - -

 

[cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)]

On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 07:01:25 -0700, "W. Watson"

>Although this is undoubtedly an interesting topic in and of itself, I wish
>someone would comment on the mechanism of the attack.

Win2000 is NT, and NT was designed to be a network chew-toy (sorry,
"client"). So, unlike Win9x that was developed as a stand-alone OS
with networking stuck on it, it waves various services directly to the
Internet, including RPC (Remote Procedure Call) and LSASS.

Code defects in both RPC and LSASS were exploited by pure network
worms, allowing these to attempt to inject code directly into the OS,
which would run this code automatically.


In the case of RPC, the attack "shape" differs between Win2000 and XP.
The original proof-of-concept Lovesan (Blaster) worm sent 4 XP attacks
for every Win2000 attack, making up random IP addresses for targets.

When the wrong attack hits the OS, the RPC service crashes, and due to
dumbo duhfault settings, this causes the PC to reset. When the right
attack hits the OS, the worm code is run and "owns" the PC, i.e. is in
a position to whatever it likes. Typically it pulls down additional
malware code and sets that up to run with Windows on all successive
boots then it may as well force a restart by pranging RPC.


In the case of LSASS, the PoC (proof-of-concept) worm was Sasser.
Like Lovesan, this spread globally in an hour or few, infecting PCs
just because they were on line and had an IP address that matched an
attacking system's guess.

To emphasize both of these types of attack can infect the PC just
because it is online, even if only for a few minutes the average
time-to-infection is/was around 20 minutes. As you can figure, that's
not enough time to download patches etc., especially as a 20 minute
average can mean infection in the first minute.

The original Lovesan and Sasser PoCs will have died down by now, but
the attack methods are still used by working bots that can do various
things steal credit card info, drop keyloggers that steal passwords,
or (most commonly perhaps) send out spam. Around 95% of the world's
spam is carried by bot-infected PCs, making the mass of infected PCs
the world's largest email service (do the maths...)

That's why I'm not suprised to see smtp issues popping up straight
after connecting an unpatched Win2000 box directly to the Internet
via dial-up, possibly even before an email app has been set up.

>hat is, the virus or whatever that detected the smtp problem. I have
>my doubts that it actually invaded him machine. To me it seemed more
>like a pop-up, since it asked the user to modify the registry.

And where do unsolicited pop-ups come from?

To pop up a dialog box, code has to be running on the PC - either
script via a browser, or raw code.

I'd say that's as much proof of invasion as finding a bullet in the
chest cavity on routine X-Ray, wouldn't you?

>Andrew Taylor wrote:

>> I am running a P111 - 850 with 256 MB RAM and a 40 Gb HD with XP Pro and it
>> runs fine.

Yep, I'd expect such happy mileage -)

IOW, fits what I routinely see, too. The slowest XP PC I saw was a
PII-266 with 128M RAM, but slower than these may have been some
faster-MHz PCs with 64M and "96M" (128M - 32M display) PCs.

Slow they were, but stable, too.



>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Running Windows-based av to kill active malware is like striking
a match to see if what you are standing in is water or petrol.
>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

 

[cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 09:34:51 -0400, "Richard Urban"

>Not the free version, last time I installed it on a computer.

The free version of AVG updates automatically.

But as it does so at a specified time of day, it may be a time of day
when a dial-up PC is not online. So it's much more useful to manually
initiate an update as soon as one has dialed up (and as easy as
Rt-click the SysTray icon, Update).

This is preferable to setting the av to automatically initiate a
dial-up connection whenever it wants to update, especially where phone
calls and/or ISP time is billed per second.

The last thing you want in such sitiuations is a PC that automatically
dials out, then never automatically disconnects.



>--------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - -
To one who only has a hammer,
everything looks like a nail
>--------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - -

 

[Pentium]

My FREE version of AVG updates everytime I boot.


"Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%238lSRoo2HHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Not the free version, last time I installed it on a computer.
>
> --
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard Urban
> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
> (For email, remove the obvious from my address)
>
>
> <LadyDungeness@Fish.Net> wrote in message
> news:lu4lb3tk2ge9o3ndkb8npv5vopoivcvik5@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 20:08:09 -0400, "Richard Urban"
>> <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> |Avast Antivirus (it updates automatically - AVG needs a manual update)
>>
>> Incorrect. AVG updates automatically. AVG has an option to update
>> manually.
>>
>>
>

 

[Peter Foldes]

And Richard did correct himself if you did read.

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

"Pentium" <pent@mycomp.com> wrote in message news:u2epBPE5HHA.1484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> My FREE version of AVG updates everytime I boot.
>
>
> "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%238lSRoo2HHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Not the free version, last time I installed it on a computer.
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Richard Urban
>> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
>> (For email, remove the obvious from my address)
>>
>>
>> <LadyDungeness@Fish.Net> wrote in message
>> news:lu4lb3tk2ge9o3ndkb8npv5vopoivcvik5@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 20:08:09 -0400, "Richard Urban"
>>> <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> |Avast Antivirus (it updates automatically - AVG needs a manual update)
>>>
>>> Incorrect. AVG updates automatically. AVG has an option to update
>>> manually.
>>>
>>>
>>
>