How I Got Rid of Sasser -- Is It Okay? ...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Linda W.
  • Start date Start date
: > : > : Hello ...
: > :
: > :
: > : The computer works fine.
: > :
: > : Is there anything else I need to do, or is what I did sufficient?
:
: I'm sorry if you think I'm stupid. I am an independent user and am
: attempting to do the best I can manage without the assistance of a
: systems administrator, et cetera.
:
: I am also far from a stellar "tech" person.
:
: But I am trying. And I'm trying to learn. That's why I ask
: questions. If I have been a bother by asking the questions, I do
: apologize.
: >
: > How about installing a virusscanner (and keeping it up to date?)? (DUH!)
:
: I had a trial with Norton. I had been told, however, by some people
: (including someone who asked an ISP about this) that if one is not
: connected to a network, it is not essential to have a virus scanner,
: so I did not renew with Norton.
:
: I realize now, however, that it is probably a good idea indeed to have
: the anti-virus scanner. That is why I have been seeking
: recommendations on a good product.

It is correct that when a computer is not connected to a network a
virusscanner is not needed. However, the internet is a network and a major
source of virii. Especially computers that have access to the internet
should have a virusscanner.

I use Norton 2002 and I like it very much. It tends to be a little heavy on
the system, but that is not a bother to me. There are many more good
virusscanners around. Read a little bit in this newsgroup and you will find
many more names of good scanners.

Personnaly I do not like Norton 2004 very much, as it tends to scan for
adware in a very unsatifactory way, causing my system problems and it has a
quirky licencing/registering system.

Note that Norton may not have protected you from Sasser, but would have
provided you with a tool to remove it.

The ISP-person you talked to should be fired. My ISP provides a free
virusscanner and recommends it to its users.

: >
: > How about installing a real firewall? (DUH!)
: >
: Again, I have read pros and cons about using a firewall on a home
: computer not connected to a network.
:
: From what I've been able to determine at the Microsoft Web site, the
: firewall that came preinstalled is considered sufficient. If this is
: not the case, I would be most interested in any information you might
: be generous enough to share.

A "real" firewall is recommended if you spend long periods on line. If not,
you run very little risk proveded you keep your windows up to date. See
below for info on updates.

: > How about updating your windows regularly? (DUH!)
: >
: Once again -- I've been told pros and cons about this. I've been told
: that some people have had frustrations with some of the updates
: causing problems with their computers. So I've been uncertain just
: what to do about updates.

Software updates have caused problems for some users, but not all. True that
these updates may cause bugs. Note that I say software-updates. These are
not necessary. There are also security updates. These should never be
ignored, because they patch vulnerabilities that for example Sasser uses.

: In fact, I am on the updates notification e-mail list. However, I
: have also been getting false notifications of updates from people
: claiming to be Microsoft. I get far more of these than I do the
: "real" ones.
:
: Consequently, sometimes I don't notice right away that I have received
: a "real notification from Microsoft because I have become so
: accustomed to receiving the false ones, which I ignore.

If you set your machine to auto update, it warns you of updates and ask you
if you want to install then. You can then choose which updates to install.
You can then skip software updates and and take only the security-updates.
These are vital!

I have a fully updated system and I have never had an update-bug. Others may
have different experiences with updates.

: > Doesn't your ISP check you for competency, before they let you on the
net?
:
: I've been on the Internet for years, using various ISPs. I have not
: been checked for competency. Apparently you feel I should be.
:
: Either way, I am trying to learn. That's why I ask questions.
:
: I apologize if my questions are boring or stupid.

As for the tone of my earlier reply. I do not criticize you for trying to
learn. The only stupid question is the one you do not ask.

The critique I have is your method to learn. You could have learned all that
I have typed and more by reading a little around in this and related
newsgroups and on internetsites on pc-security.

Your questions were not boring. They excited me very much. :-)
 
On that special day, GSV Three Minds in a Can, ([email protected])
said...
the
UK Coastguard service has been computerless most of today from the same
cause. Hopefully someone will be keelhauled.

In Germany, the postal bank's remote banking service couldn't serve the
customers - officials said, they had set the firewall rules to an
extremely high level to keep sasser out. Non officials said, the postal
computers had been bogged down by the said worm so that they couldn't be
used any more.

Well, maybe the postal bank computers were even patched, but that is of
little help if so many customers with unpatched machines on DSL are
unconsciously running a dDoS attack against their homebanking provider.


Gabriele Neukam

(e-mail address removed)
 
John Dotson wrote:
[snip]
It is correct that when a computer is not connected to a network a
virusscanner is not needed.

that's a load of bull... apparently you are unaware of the fact that
you can get viruses without a network connection... in fact you can get
viruses from software you buy in a store, or cd's that get shipped with
a magazine, etc... it's not just possible, it has happened...
legitimate software vendors can and have distributed viruses
unknowingly - even microsoft has done it...
 
: John Dotson wrote:
: [snip]
: > It is correct that when a computer is not connected to a network a
: > virusscanner is not needed.
:
: that's a load of bull... apparently you are unaware of the fact that
: you can get viruses without a network connection... in fact you can get
: viruses from software you buy in a store, or cd's that get shipped with
: a magazine, etc... it's not just possible, it has happened...
: legitimate software vendors can and have distributed viruses
: unknowingly - even microsoft has done it...
:

Quite. And that is very common or very rare? Name one documented and
verified incident?

Remember many blaster-infections for example were unjustly blaimed on the
vendors. People switched on their new pc and when on line, only to discover
within minutes that they had a virus.

Sure I have heard these rumours about the spread of virii via vendors and
manufacturors. But I have never read or heard about one real incident.

So I am convinced that it is very rare.
 
Sure I have heard these rumours about the spread of virii via
vendors and manufacturors. But I have never read or heard about
one real incident.

Actually, there have been many cases e.g:
- Several freebie cover disks on magazines, until the publishers
tightened up their release procedures.
- Word macro Concept (alias 'prank') virus that was distributed via
MSDN http://ciac.llnl.gov/ciac/bulletins/g-10a.shtml#Concept

But you are correct in suggesting it is not a high probability threat
in recent times i.e. in the last 7 years or so.
 
Bitstring <[email protected]>, from the
wonderful person Linda W. said:
I'll leave the firewall on. And I'll try to stay more current with
the updates. (Do you have any opinion on how one should decide which
ones to install and which ones to not bother with? As a general rule,
should one check for and always install critical updates?)

I install the critical ones. Actually I use auto update and let MS send
me the ones they think are critical. They have screwed up once (and
fixed it within 2 weeks) in 3 years.
And I'm looking for a good anti-virus program.

Any opinions about McAfee? (I'm not sure if I should start a new
thread or if poeple would get annoyed.) But they have a good rebate
offer right now and I was thinking of trying their anti-virus.

You can find as many people for, or against, any of the commercial
packages. Any/all of them are way, way better than nothing. A quick
google (groups.google.com) against previous postings here will reveal as
many opinions as there are packages to choose from.
 
from the wonderful person John said:
: John Dotson wrote:
: [snip]
: > It is correct that when a computer is not connected to a network a
: > virusscanner is not needed.
:
: that's a load of bull... apparently you are unaware of the fact that
: you can get viruses without a network connection... in fact you can get
: viruses from software you buy in a store, or cd's that get shipped with
: a magazine, etc... it's not just possible, it has happened...
: legitimate software vendors can and have distributed viruses
: unknowingly - even microsoft has done it...
:

Quite. And that is very common or very rare? Name one documented and
verified incident?

Remember many blaster-infections for example were unjustly blaimed on the
vendors. People switched on their new pc and when on line, only to discover
within minutes that they had a virus.

Sure I have heard these rumours about the spread of virii via vendors and
manufacturors. But I have never read or heard about one real incident.

So I am convinced that it is very rare.

And pretty harmless for the rest of us even if it does happen. I could
care less if people get viruses, and trash their computers .. it's when
they start trashing (or overloading) shared resources, like the WWW, and
my Email in-box, that I get annoyed.

What they choose to do in the privacy of their own home is of little
concern .. just like they can drive 300 MPH with their eyes closed, as
long as they do it on their private airstrip and not a public highway.
 
John said:
: John Dotson wrote:
: [snip]
: > It is correct that when a computer is not connected to a network a
: > virusscanner is not needed.
:
: that's a load of bull... apparently you are unaware of the fact that
: you can get viruses without a network connection... in fact you can get
: viruses from software you buy in a store, or cd's that get shipped with
: a magazine, etc... it's not just possible, it has happened...
: legitimate software vendors can and have distributed viruses
: unknowingly - even microsoft has done it...
:

Quite. And that is very common or very rare? Name one documented and
verified incident?

google is your friend...
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-935994.html (microsoft spread nimda in
korean versions of visual studio.net in 2002)

[snip]
Sure I have heard these rumours about the spread of virii via vendors and
manufacturors. But I have never read or heard about one real incident.

So I am convinced that it is very rare.

http://www.nha.com/news/archives/mswazzu.htm (microsoft spread wm/wazzu
at a swiss IT exhibition)
http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/wazzu.shtml (microsoft spread wm/wazzu
several times during the fall of 1996)
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/computer-virus/alt-faq/part4/ (microsoft
spread wm/concept in 1995)

and this is just one company...
 
Linda W. - 05.05.2004 19:37 :

[...]

Linda, you are on the right way and demonstrate a high engagement.
Antivirus is really a complex theme. So many people prefer "only" her
own antivirus software. And: There is no one perfect solution for all.
It depends on many different imginations and behaviors. As you read this
NG for some days/weeks you perhaps get more and more confused. To make
your confusion complete: My *personal* opinion after years of
experiences with different AV programs (Avast Pro, AVG, Norton, MacAfee
and and and) ended up with BitDefenderPro 7.2 a small but IMHO sufficent
firewall inclusive, running parallel with my Outpost firwall, as the
best solution to me.

That my decission may not be a bad one shows

http://www.anti-virus-software-review.com/

for example. Have a look there!

BTW: The (email-) support of BitDefender is first class - not compar
Feedback very fastcompetent and friendly within one or two days.

Excuse my bad English but I'm German and English is only my fourth language.
 
Beauregard T. Shagnasty said:
Quoth the raven named Linda W.:



No, but after years of experience, you are asking more or less newbie
questions... <g>

Boy, you guys are rough on a newcomer.

I guess I should explain it better. When I said "for years," that
would include the years that I worked in an office environment, with a
systems administrator and a company network.

The systems administrator took care of the company's security issues,
as well as whatever programs or software was needed. The systems
administrator also handled e-mail issues.

I was employed in communications and public affairs. I was not hired
to be the systems administrator and I was not expected to know how to
be one. (We didn't ask the systems administrator to set up press
conferences or edit newsletters, either. That was what my department
did.)

I did, however, use the Internet. I got online and I typed in URLs.
I wsa therefore on the Internet.

It has only been since I have become self-employed -- and consequently
do not have the luxury of a systems administrator (not to mention a
company that provides computers, necessary software, et cetera) --
that I have now found it necessary to learn as much of this sort of
thing as possible since I now have to do it all myself.

That's why I'm trying to learn.

So in that sense, I am a newbie.

If you prefer newbie's don't post questions to this newsgroup, please
just let me know. I'm not meaning to bother people. I'm just trying
to learn.

Thank you.

Linda W.
 
John Donson said:
: > : > : Hello ...
: > :
: > :
: > : The computer works fine.
: > :
: > : Is there anything else I need to do, or is what I did sufficient?
:
: I'm sorry if you think I'm stupid. I am an independent user and am
: attempting to do the best I can manage without the assistance of a
: systems administrator, et cetera.
:
: I am also far from a stellar "tech" person.
:
: But I am trying. And I'm trying to learn. That's why I ask
: questions. If I have been a bother by asking the questions, I do
: apologize.
: >
: > How about installing a virusscanner (and keeping it up to date?)? (DUH!)
:
: I had a trial with Norton. I had been told, however, by some people
: (including someone who asked an ISP about this) that if one is not
: connected to a network, it is not essential to have a virus scanner,
: so I did not renew with Norton.
:
: I realize now, however, that it is probably a good idea indeed to have
: the anti-virus scanner. That is why I have been seeking
: recommendations on a good product.

It is correct that when a computer is not connected to a network a
virusscanner is not needed. However, the internet is a network and a major
source of virii. Especially computers that have access to the internet
should have a virusscanner.

I use Norton 2002 and I like it very much. It tends to be a little heavy on
the system, but that is not a bother to me. There are many more good
virusscanners around. Read a little bit in this newsgroup and you will find
many more names of good scanners.

Personnaly I do not like Norton 2004 very much, as it tends to scan for
adware in a very unsatifactory way, causing my system problems and it has a
quirky licencing/registering system.

Note that Norton may not have protected you from Sasser, but would have
provided you with a tool to remove it.

The ISP-person you talked to should be fired. My ISP provides a free
virusscanner and recommends it to its users.

: >
: > How about installing a real firewall? (DUH!)
: >
: Again, I have read pros and cons about using a firewall on a home
: computer not connected to a network.
:
: From what I've been able to determine at the Microsoft Web site, the
: firewall that came preinstalled is considered sufficient. If this is
: not the case, I would be most interested in any information you might
: be generous enough to share.

A "real" firewall is recommended if you spend long periods on line. If not,
you run very little risk proveded you keep your windows up to date. See
below for info on updates.

: > How about updating your windows regularly? (DUH!)
: >
: Once again -- I've been told pros and cons about this. I've been told
: that some people have had frustrations with some of the updates
: causing problems with their computers. So I've been uncertain just
: what to do about updates.

Software updates have caused problems for some users, but not all. True that
these updates may cause bugs. Note that I say software-updates. These are
not necessary. There are also security updates. These should never be
ignored, because they patch vulnerabilities that for example Sasser uses.

: In fact, I am on the updates notification e-mail list. However, I
: have also been getting false notifications of updates from people
: claiming to be Microsoft. I get far more of these than I do the
: "real" ones.
:
: Consequently, sometimes I don't notice right away that I have received
: a "real notification from Microsoft because I have become so
: accustomed to receiving the false ones, which I ignore.

If you set your machine to auto update, it warns you of updates and ask you
if you want to install then. You can then choose which updates to install.
You can then skip software updates and and take only the security-updates.
These are vital!

I have a fully updated system and I have never had an update-bug. Others may
have different experiences with updates.

: > Doesn't your ISP check you for competency, before they let you on the
net?
:
: I've been on the Internet for years, using various ISPs. I have not
: been checked for competency. Apparently you feel I should be.
:
: Either way, I am trying to learn. That's why I ask questions.
:
: I apologize if my questions are boring or stupid.

As for the tone of my earlier reply. I do not criticize you for trying to
learn. The only stupid question is the one you do not ask.

The critique I have is your method to learn. You could have learned all that
I have typed and more by reading a little around in this and related
newsgroups and on internetsites on pc-security.

Your questions were not boring. They excited me very much. :-)


Thank you very much for this plethora of valuable and educational
information. I will read it more than once so that I can absorb it
better.

I very much appreciate your taking the time to share your knowledge
with me.

About my "method to learn" -- I realize that I could find information
in anti-virus software on Internet sites. I guess my first choice was
to come here because it seemed like there were experts here and that I
could ask questions in a more specific manner. (In fact, this thread
started because I was hoping an expert might simply tell me if I'd
done anything I shouldn't have in the way that I got rid of the Sasser
worm.)

I wouldn't have known how to go to an Internet site and find a
response to something as specific as "Did I get rid of the Sasser worm
correctly?".

I asked questions here rather than poking around usenet groups via
Google because I thought that way I could ask very specifically what I
was trying to learn.

But I honestly wasn't trying to waste people's time by asking them to
repeat answers to questions that could be answered elsewhere.

So I guess from now on, I shouldn't post questions in this group, but
rather do Internet searches and see what I can turn up that way. I
can certainly do that.

Having said that, I will say again how much I appreciate your taking
the time to respond to my questions. I'll try to restrain myself in
the future.

And having said that -- McAfee has a very good offer right now for its
anti-virus software. Any reason not to go with McAfee?

(And yes, I did do a Google search and will do some more reading. But
since you know so much -- seriously -- I would really appreciate your
personal opinion.)

Now if I can just figure out why all the links don't work.

Thank you again.

Linda W.
 
Quoth the raven named Linda W.:
Boy, you guys are rough on a newcomer.

No, not rough... maybe too curt? Sometimes I don't have extra time to
type long flowing stories. said:
I guess I should explain it better. ...

You really didn't need to... but that's ok.
That's why I'm trying to learn.

So in that sense, I am a newbie.

If you prefer newbie's don't post questions to this newsgroup, please
just let me know. I'm not meaning to bother people.

No, post away. Anyone who asks intelligent questions will receive
intelligent answers. Well, usually...
I'm just trying to learn.

...as are we all. <g>
 
Linda said:
And I'm looking for a good anti-virus program.

You can start at these two sites that will give you a good selection.
Be sure to bookmark them.

http://www.wilders.org/index.htm
and
http://www.firewallguide.com/
Any opinions about McAfee? (I'm not sure if I should start a new
thread or if poeple would get annoyed.) But they have a good rebate
offer right now and I was thinking of trying their anti-virus.

I've used McAfee with good results, but stopped when they combined
their firewall with their AV program. I prefer to have my own
combination of AV & firewall which is different.

Netuser 58
 
Peter Seiler said:
Linda W. - 05.05.2004 19:37 :

[...]

Linda, you are on the right way and demonstrate a high engagement.
Antivirus is really a complex theme. So many people prefer "only" her
own antivirus software. And: There is no one perfect solution for all.
It depends on many different imginations and behaviors. As you read this
NG for some days/weeks you perhaps get more and more confused. To make
your confusion complete: My *personal* opinion after years of
experiences with different AV programs (Avast Pro, AVG, Norton, MacAfee
and and and) ended up with BitDefenderPro 7.2 a small but IMHO sufficent
firewall inclusive, running parallel with my Outpost firwall, as the
best solution to me.

That my decission may not be a bad one shows

http://www.anti-virus-software-review.com/

for example. Have a look there!

BTW: The (email-) support of BitDefender is first class - not compar
Feedback very fastcompetent and friendly within one or two days.

Excuse my bad English but I'm German and English is only my fourth language.


Thank you very much for your kind comments.

And you are so right -- it's very confusing trying to make a choice.

I post to this newsgroup via Google, and just my limited experience
with reading this group has shown some indication of how many
different opinions there are.

I need to look into McAfee, since they have a good rebate offer at the
moment.

I'll read about BitDefender, too.

And I'll check out the URL that you provided.

And ... I don't even have a fourth language -- at least not to the
extent that I can read and write in four languages -- so I think your
English is impressive.

Thanks again.

Linda W.
 
Peter Seiler said:
Linda W. - 05.05.2004 19:37 :

[...]

Linda, you are on the right way and demonstrate a high engagement.
Antivirus is really a complex theme. So many people prefer "only" her
own antivirus software. And: There is no one perfect solution for all.
It depends on many different imginations and behaviors. As you read this
NG for some days/weeks you perhaps get more and more confused. To make
your confusion complete: My *personal* opinion after years of
experiences with different AV programs (Avast Pro, AVG, Norton, MacAfee
and and and) ended up with BitDefenderPro 7.2 a small but IMHO sufficent
firewall inclusive, running parallel with my Outpost firwall, as the
best solution to me.

That my decission may not be a bad one shows

http://www.anti-virus-software-review.com/

for example. Have a look there!

BTW: The (email-) support of BitDefender is first class - not compar
Feedback very fastcompetent and friendly within one or two days.

Excuse my bad English but I'm German and English is only my fourth language.


Thank you very much for your kind comments.

And you are right -- there are so many opinions to be had on this
subject.

I post to this newgroup via Google, and just my limited experience
from reading it today has shown me how many different opinions are
expressed here about the various anti-virus softwares.

I need to read about McAfee, since they have a very good rebate right
now.

And I will look into BitDefender, too.

I'll also check out the link that you provided.

And I don't even have a fourth language -- at least to the extent of
being able to read and converse in it -- so I think your English is
impressive.

Thanks again!

Linda W.
 
Beauregard T. Shagnasty said:
Quoth the raven named Linda W.:


No, not rough... maybe too curt? Sometimes I don't have extra time to


You really didn't need to... but that's ok.


No, post away. Anyone who asks intelligent questions will receive
intelligent answers. Well, usually...


..as are we all. <g>


Thank you -- very much -- for those comments. :-)

Linda W.
 
Why can't you just answer the question, or better still, give no input at
all, instead of adding a useless snide remark?
Because he's probably an unlucky bastard like me who's spending half
his time fixing idiots PCs this week because of this.
 
Rather than post snide, smartass remarks in response to individuals
attempting to make sense of topics they shouldn't need to be concerned with,
why not save the sarcasm for those marketing vulnerable software and the
complete idiots who seek to exploit those vulnerabilities to the nuisance of
all for reasons I for one fail to understand.
Dave Cohen
Question.

I assume you have a car.
When you park it up on the street do you lock it or do you leave it
unlocked with the stereo in and a few valueables on display?
 
On that special day, John Donson, ([email protected]) said...
Name one documented and
verified incident?

The first such incident I know of, was a two or three day period of
delivering infected floppies of Freehand (produced by Aldus for the
MacIntosh), with the Peace virus on them. At least this is what Allan
Lundell in his book does tell.


Gabriele Neukam

(e-mail address removed)
 
[lots of interesting good stuff...]
And having said that -- McAfee has a very good offer right now
for its anti-virus software. Any reason not to go with McAfee?

Well I'm just an average user. In my late win95'ties I was content
with McAfee for two years. I think it's still quite reliable.

Then I tried Norton, which was hmmm, almost as good - though it
seemed a bit "fat" and to much interfering with the bowels of
Windows. Google and all the experts might sing an Opera on that..

Now for the last two or three years I've been quite happy with
AntiVir Personal Editon <http://www.free-av.de/> it's free and
there's updates almost daily (if necessary).

But I never again will rely on any AV-Programm again, it just
goes along with never-ending struggle to practice "safe hex".

Also Usenet (along withe Google gave me great information on
how to close Ports or end Services to keep "Blaster" and
"Sasser" out.

And I appreciate Windows Update and XP's built in little
Firewall, no need for a fat & creamy lying "Zone Alarm" or a
fat big personal firewall - but I might be wrong - very wrong....

Sorry for blabbering,

Greetz, Maebhe
 
Back
Top