activate

[b35853]

How do I get around the live update
and activation. The computer is not
connected to the internet. I use the
computer to burn dvd's and such. I
installed norton 2006.

 

[Virus Guy]

How do I get around the live update and activation.
The computer is not connected to the internet.

You don't need anti-virus protection if you don't have it connected to
the internet.

I installed norton 2006.

You especially don't need NAV 2006 if you don't surf the net or read
e-mail on the system.

And if the computer has no regular connection to the internet, then
your virus definition files will soon become out of date - but then
again there will be no real way for viruses to enter your system
anyways.

 

[David H. Lipman]

From: "Virus Guy" <[email protected]>


|
| You especially don't need NAV 2006 if you don't surf the net or read
| e-mail on the system.
|
| And if the computer has no regular connection to the internet, then
| your virus definition files will soon become out of date - but then
| again there will be no real way for viruses to enter your system
| anyways.

Sure there is; Floppy disks, Flash RAM drives, CDROM, DVDs, ZIP, and any other removable
media.

 

[b35853]

your right I download stuff from the internet,
lots of stuff from russia, I rip and burn dvd
my xternal is so full of shit I'd be afraid to
use it on the internet

 

[Virus Guy]

your right I download stuff from the internet,

Well shit. You said in your first post:

The computer is not connected to the internet.

Any computer that is not connected to the internet has no (easy,
reliable, dependable) way to update it's AV software. So even if you
have multi-media files from un-trustworthy sources, it would be a crap
shoot if your AV software was current enough to detect it.

And if the multi-media files was coming from your own hardware (your
own cameras) then there's basically no risk that your digital camera
or cam-corder is going to generate viruses or other mal-ware.

Mal-ware from CD-rom or DVD or CF/SD memory - yea sure, what-ever.
Way too low a threat level to justify putting AV software on an
otherwise un-connected machine. Most PC's don't even have floppy
drives anymore - and even if an unconnected machine gets a virus or
trojan - what's going to happen? It ain't gonna be someone's backdoor
or zombie now will it?

The only thing more stupid is putting firewall software on an
unconnected machine.

 

[David H. Lipman]

From: "Virus Guy" <[email protected]>


|
| Any computer that is not connected to the internet has no (easy,
| reliable, dependable) way to update it's AV software. So even if you
| have multi-media files from un-trustworthy sources, it would be a crap
| shoot if your AV software was current enough to detect it.
|
| And if the multi-media files was coming from your own hardware (your
| own cameras) then there's basically no risk that your digital camera
| or cam-corder is going to generate viruses or other mal-ware.
|
| Mal-ware from CD-rom or DVD or CF/SD memory - yea sure, what-ever.
| Way too low a threat level to justify putting AV software on an
| otherwise un-connected machine. Most PC's don't even have floppy
| drives anymore - and even if an unconnected machine gets a virus or
| trojan - what's going to happen? It ain't gonna be someone's backdoor
| or zombie now will it?
|
| The only thing more stupid is putting firewall software on an
| unconnected machine.

That's a wrong assertion. I have never need a Boot Sector infector spread via the Internet.
However I have seen the numerous desktops infected via removable media. Before there was
wide access to the Internet there was AV software. Why ? Because true viruse spread even
without the Internet. What has changed is with the Internet came more non-viral malware
than true viruses.

Please don't give bad advice. Maybe NAV is unjustifiable but having AV software is totally
justifiable. Even with sneakernet !

 

[ryan weihl]

How do I get around the live update
and activation. The computer is not
connected to the internet. I use the
computer to burn dvd's and such. I
installed norton 2006.

you must have another computer then. go
to the symantec site and download the definition
updates, then move the updates to computer
that is not connected to the internet
rw

 

[Roger Wilco]

You don't need anti-virus protection if you don't have it connected to
the internet.

Yes you do, what you don't need to worry about as much are some worms
and trojans that rely on connectivity. Viruses don't "have" to work that
way, some hide inside programs that come in through other means. You
don't need AV on 'that machine' at all as long as you analyze or scan
everything you bring in before you bring it in.

You especially don't need NAV 2006 if you don't surf the net or read
e-mail on the system.

What about macro viruses in document files? What about malware hiding in
new utilities and applications? What about maliciously crafted data in
data filetypes?

And if the computer has no regular connection to the internet, then
your virus definition files will soon become out of date - but then
again there will be no real way for viruses to enter your system
anyways.

Just because the current trend for viruses is the e-mail (or other
network) worm, doesn't mean that all viruses need connectivity.

 

[Virus Guy]

Just because the current trend for viruses is the e-mail
(or other network) worm, doesn't mean that all viruses need
connectivity.

Think about it.

A computer that has (by intent or design) no internet connection will
have a drastically reduced exposure to malware.

You can raise the theoretical spectre that the user obtains data files
from external sources on external media and they could be infected,
but an isolated computer is most likely used for special purposes and
the files that get transfered to it are most likely going to be
specialized files of some sort and not likely to be "infectable". You
also can't discount that the source computer(s) where the files come
from do run updated AV software and can provide assurance that the
files are not infected.

The issue of AV protection on an isolated (un-connected) computer is a
circular argument. Without constant updates, the quality of AV
protection is questionable. But by being isolated, the entry points
for malware are significantly reduced. The extra resources used by
the AV software, the extra boot-up time, becomes more of a liability
than the benefits confered by the dubious protection.

 

[Roger Wilco]

Think about it.

I have.

A computer that has (by intent or design) no internet connection will
have a drastically reduced exposure to malware.

True - and has drastically reduced (but not eliminated) the need for AV.

You can raise the theoretical spectre that the user obtains data files
from external sources on external media and they could be infected,

Not only data files - executables too.

but an isolated computer

I don't think it is an isolated computer if new executables are brought
in and executed. The OP only said that it had no internet connection.

is most likely used for special purposes and
the files that get transfered to it are most likely going to be
specialized files of some sort and not likely to be "infectable".

True of isolated computers. But the OP's computer isn't isolated.

You
also can't discount that the source computer(s) where the files come
from do run updated AV software and can provide assurance that the
files are not infected.

Trusting the source of files to have such is dangerous securitywise.
Trust yet verify is the way.

The issue of AV protection on an isolated (un-connected) computer is a
circular argument.

Especially if you stipulate that "isolated" = "un-connected" (as in no
internet). There is more to isolation than a pair of diagonal cutters.

Without constant updates, the quality of AV
protection is questionable.

The quality of AV "protection" is 'always' questionable - and is likely
to stay that way.

Constant updates are only needed if your practice is to constantly
expose yourself to new malware. All you really need to do is to make
sure that the update is enough "newer" than the suspected malware is. If
you have had the suspected malware (inactive of course) for two weeks,
then you update and scan with defs that most likely have that malware
known to them by then.

But by being isolated, the entry points
for malware are significantly reduced.

If truly isolated - they're completely gone (assuming the software
already onboard isn't too broken).

The extra resources used by
the AV software, the extra boot-up time, becomes more of a liability
than the benefits confered by the dubious protection.

That is one reason why 'on-demand' AV is superior if you can wield it.
The problem is the difficulty in correctly implementing it (especially
in "connected" computers) - but the OP's (semi-isolated?) case should
make it easier.