> Thank you, Mr. Norton!
>
> cgf
>
Number of times I've lost data to a virus: 0.
Number of times I've been alerted to a real virus by a virus scanner: 0.
Number of times I've lost data to a virus scanner: 2.
Norton, McCaffee, they all go in the same hopper as far as I'm concerned.
(Figured I'
I have the same problem. NAV update 2/13/02 rev 6 reports that
the cygz.dll file succumbs to the Backdoor.EggHead virus. I'm
using OpenSSH_3.0.2p1, SSH protocols 1.5/2.0, OpenSSL
0x0090603f.
Is this a valid issue? Is there a workaround, like backing out
to an older version?
j e r r y
^^^
On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 10:54:43AM -0500, Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote:
>>My opinion is that common-sense practices don't belong in the FAQ.
>
>I have to say I agree. However, common sense seems to be loosely
>interpreted on this list. I guess the question is how much of a
>substitute fo
At 10:37 AM 2/14/2002, you wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 03:31:22PM +, David Starks-Browning wrote:
> >On Thursday 14 Feb 02, Peter Buckley writes:
> >> I agree about the healthy skepticism- this was obviously a false
> >> positive from the very start, but I don't think the faq addresses th
At 10:31 AM 2/14/2002, David Starks-Browning wrote:
>On Thursday 14 Feb 02, Peter Buckley writes:
> > I agree about the healthy skepticism- this was obviously a false
> > positive from the very start, but I don't think the faq addresses this
> > type of false positive.
>
>Addressing virus alerts
On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 03:31:22PM +, David Starks-Browning wrote:
>On Thursday 14 Feb 02, Peter Buckley writes:
>> I agree about the healthy skepticism- this was obviously a false
>> positive from the very start, but I don't think the faq addresses this
>> type of false positive.
>
>Address
On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:35:33AM -0500, Peter Buckley wrote:
>I don't think that faq would have avoided or truncated this thread. It
>seems related, but it is in fact different.
>
>If someone followed the instructions in the faq, they would have had a
>false positive reported on cygz.dll. When
On Thursday 14 Feb 02, Peter Buckley writes:
> I agree about the healthy skepticism- this was obviously a false
> positive from the very start, but I don't think the faq addresses this
> type of false positive.
Addressing virus alerts in the FAQ has always been a dilemma for me.
I do not like t
OK, David (Starks-Browning), would you be willing to accommodate Peter's
request with an FAQ entry or rewording?
Larry Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFK Partners, Inc. http://www.rfk.com
838 Washington Street (508) 893-9779 - RFK Offic
I think we do read the faq differently- when it says "antivirus programs
have been known to report false positives when extracting compressed tar
archives" and "consider disabling your anti-virus software when running
SETUP", I don't associate that with getting a false positive when *not*
runn
OK, perhaps you and I read the FAQ differently. I read it to indicate that
you should assume that any reported infection from Cygwin files are false
until you can determine otherwise. To me, it's worthwhile to inform the
list of viruses in any Cygwin related software if the virus is real. Howe
I don't think that faq would have avoided or truncated this thread. It
seems related, but it is in fact different.
If someone followed the instructions in the faq, they would have had a
false positive reported on cygz.dll. Whenever the cygz.dll file was
called (say, by invoking cygcheck), the
Hm, it seems like this entire thread could have been avoided or at least
truncated by a simple visit to the FAQ:
Is setup.exe, or one of the packages, infected with a virus?
http://cygwin.com/faq/faq_2.html#SEC11
Larry Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFK Partners, Inc.
Sorry for the panic...My bet is all you can do is to update the package zlib
...
NAV this morning had released its new vir-definition..Thanks
- Original Message -
From: "KAMDAR,NILESH (A-Sonoma,ex1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 10:58 PM
S
- Original Message -
From: "Randall R Schulz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Michael A Chase" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 20:18
Subject: Re: anybody else also infected
> My NAV does not detect any virus
mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 18:23
Subject: Re: anybody else also infected
> Thanks..but i have no ides what's wrong there. My vir-definition is
updated
> within half an hour..my cygwin is now dead.Would you pls send to me a copy
> of t
>
To: "hongxun lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 9:18 PM
Subject: Re: anybody else also infected
> Hong Xun,
>
> I scanned my copy of cygz.dll (/bin/cygz.dll) with Norton AntiVirus (with
> the weekly updates downloa
Hong Xun,
I scanned my copy of cygz.dll (/bin/cygz.dll) with Norton AntiVirus (with
the weekly updates downloaded and installed earlier today). It found no
problem with that file.
For the record:
% cygcheck -v cygz.dll
Found: D:\cygwin\bin\cygz.dll
D:\cygwin\bin\cygz.dll - os=4.0 img=1.0 sys=
18 matches
Mail list logo
