Re: How to Protect Message Bases (Was Re: PC-cillin and TB!)

[Chris]

David M. Dickerson @ 2004-Nov-15 9:28:30 PM
"How to Protect Message Bases (Was Re: PC-cillin and TB!)" <mid:[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]>

> Symantec will never offer a plug-in for TB. Because of TB's
> relatively small user base, Symantec would have no economic
> incentive for a plug-in. (Now, if we could just find a way to
> increase drastically the number of people who use TB...!)

Also, Symantec's e-mail scanner is designed differently from those
from companies that provide a plugin for The Bat! NAV's scanner is a
proxy scanner; it sits between The Bat! and your e-mail server
examining all traffic between the two. That Bat! plugins scan each
message as it is downloaded by The Bat!

NAV's scanner works for all e-mail clients. The Bat! plugins only work
for The Bat!

-- 
Chris
Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma.

Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2
Accessing a POP3 mailbox.

Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open.


pgpBULBwmY6OA.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

How to Protect Message Bases (Was Re: PC-cillin and TB!)

[David M. Dickerson]

Hello, P. Johnson.
On Friday, 5 November 2004, 12:03:59 AM, you wrote:
PJ> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best
PJ> firewall and virus protection I can, and have been
PJ> looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin Internet Security.
Regarding the issue of antivirus software and The Bat!,
you might want to check the following RITLabs Knowledge
Base article, which is directly relevant (e.g., the
use of antiviral plug-ins):
On how to protect message bases from being damaged.
http://www.ritlabs.com/kb/idx/16/043/article/
Others on the list have brought up the problems associated
with antivirus products that lack plug-ins for The Bat! and
this article describes that issue and possible problems (that
I *will* face, I fear).
I have been evaluating TB! 3.0.1.33 and I use Norton AntiVirus
as part of Norton SystemWorks. My evaluation period is up, but
I received very few messages, which is why I think that NAV
did not trash my installation of TB. I was "spared," because
I had very few messages.
I am very concerned, however, that I will have all kinds of
problems if I can afford to register The Bat! and reinstall it
on my computer after I perform a clean installation of Windows
XP Professional (SP 2). I was given SystemWorks 2005 Premier
as a gift and the giver cannot return it. (I am also going to
replace the Windows XP firewall, which lacks egress control,
as several people have mentioned. Fortunately, as others have
said, good, *free* firewall software exists; plus, I have a
hardware firewall/router/switch. ZoneAlarm works well with me
under Windows 2000 Professional, and I got used to handling
its warnings easily.)
If The Bat! polls all of my e-mail accounts and downloads all
of the messages (and I plan to clean out the accounts via a
Web interface), I will have enough message bases to put me in
real danger of damaged TB files, slow performance by The
Bat! and lost e-mail. NAV might cause havoc with TB, although
I do not recall any posts mentioning NAV causing problems
with TB.
It has been a while since I installed SystemWorks, so I do not
know if I can choose not to install NAV and use a product that
has a plug-in for TB.
I thought that the article would be of interest to you, and to
other members of the list. (The bottom line is that RITLabs
states that you should use an antivirus product that has a plug-
in for TB.) The article contains good advice in a short space.
I wish that I could find a solution to this issue myself, because
I know that I am going to be a trouble!
Do any other users of Norton AntiVirus have problems with The Bat!
and damaged files or slow performance?
Alexander S. Kunz has given me much information about Kaspersky's
products and he is an experienced professional, but I am basically
stuck with NAV. (Registering The Bat! is going to cost a relative
fortune for me, because of my current financial status, so I just
cannot afford to ditch the Symantec product that I received as a
gift.)
I hope that the Knowledge Base Article helps!
Cordially,
David
P.S. -- Symantec will never offer a plug-in for TB. Because
of TB's relatively small user base, Symantec would have no
economic incentive for a plug-in. (Now, if we could just find a
way to increase drastically the number of people who use TB...!)
I know that I want to be a registered user, despite the fact that
I am basically stuck with Norton AntiVirus, which I fear could
lead to some *very* messy consequences.
I want to follow the guidelines of the KB article, because RITLabs
knows their product, obviously, but I cannot afford to do so. I
know that RITLabs offers a plug-in API, but I do not think that
my basic experience with ANSI C will allow me to do anything with
the API. ;-)
--
http://ddickerson.igc.org/
_
Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to 
School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx


Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello Mica,

Saturday, November 6, 2004, 7:46:50 PM, you wrote:

>> sending this off-list so people won't think I'm advertising. :-)

> Yea, that's fine. :grin:

Oh my gosh...

> And hiding a good product which might be of benefit for TB users.
> Fine too. :grin:

I just forgot to delete the first phrase when I decided to send the
message to the list rather than PM... because I didn't want to hide
the good product. :-)

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexandermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hello Alexander,

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 19:16:05 +0100 GMT (07/11/2004, 01:16 +0700 GMT),
Alexander S. Kunz wrote:

ASK> sending this off-list so people won't think I'm advertising. :-)

I guess you are advedrtising folder templates. ;-)

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas.

Durch Trockenheit steht Landwirten das Wasser bis zum Hals. *

Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build  A 





Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hello Andre,

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:56:35 +0100 GMT (07/11/2004, 22:56 +0700 GMT),
Andre Wichartz wrote:

>> TB never stored msgbases in plain text format like Netscape (Unix
>> mailbox).

AW> All I know is that I can easily open and read them with a texteditor like
AW> vi or xedit.

Just opened such a file with VIM. There seems to be a block of
formatting charaters at the beginning of the file, and then again
between the mails or so. I think that means it is not a plain-text
file, even though much of it is readable.

Compare this with a unix mailbox, and you see what is meant.

.TBB files are archives. Change the extension to .UUE and then open
them as usual in Total Commander - suddenly everything is much
clearer. ;-)

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas.

Kripo greift zu: "Uber hundert Einbruche gehen auf ihr Konto." *

Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build  A 





Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Mica Mijatovic]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

   ***^\ ."_)~~
 ~( __ _"o   Was another beautiful day, Sat, 6 Nov 2004,
   @  @  at 19:16:05 +0100, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote:

> Hello Pat,

> sending this off-list so people won't think I'm advertising. :-)

Yea, that's fine. :grin:

And hiding a good product which might be of benefit for TB users.

Fine too. :grin:

- --
Mica
PGP key uploaded at:  once just before breakfast
<>o<>
[Earth LOG: 66 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing]
OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium
with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux;
and, for TB sometimes Libranet (Linux) 2.8.1, via Cross Over Office
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iD8DBQFBjRwY9q62QPd3XuIRAsUpAJ9+ye113pAf0C9hBRKZvEBKo1eX2gCglje0
kUke1b4EaUaEIkPtjjh/MqA=
=dbcZ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Mica Mijatovic]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

   ***^\ ."_)~~
 ~( __ _"o   Was another beautiful day, Sat, 6 Nov 2004,
   @  @  at 17:33:57 +0100, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote:

> My virus scanner also checks TB's messagebase format (I'm using GData
> AVK, it contains the KAV and the BitDefender engine) and does find
> messages with malicious attachments that way - I don't know if thats a
> special feature of GData's AVK or if this is part of either the KAV or
> BD engine.

I don't know. Anyway, if it finds such attachments in the such mail-base
form then it only can be good.

>> Try this and see yourself. Put a virus file as an attachment in a new
>> message, save it in Outbox, and scan the respective TBB file/the message
>> base. Will show nothing. Check directly out the attachment in TB, and AV
>> will react.

> I don't even get that far because the scanner catches the .tmp file with
> the virus... because I haven't excluded the folder where TB puts its .tmp
> files... :-}

Of course, for a such test, an AV dog firstly has to be disabled, no?.
(-; Then you place the infected file where you want, and then you enable
the AV again. (-:

>> I have to throw some turkey slices (from my Candy freezer I bought for
>> about 250 Euros, for my winter [Native] American turkeys, instead Win
>> XP, after I had tried it for a month or so) on the grill now. Hungry. (:
>> You are welcome to participate. (-:

> Thanks for the offer *g*. That would mean travelling to Serbia if I'm not
> guessing all wrong, and I fear it would be a little bit too far to arrive
> in time for dinner. :-)

Yes, you remembered good. (: The freezer (I mean my Candy freezer I
bought for about 250 Euros, for my winter [Native] American turkeys,
instead Win XP, after I had tried it for a month or so) is in New
Belgrade. I don't know the speed of Danube, but if you'd use its current
you'd come very near my home. (-:

OK, then, some other time. (:

- --
Mica
PGP key uploaded at:  once just before breakfast
<>o<>
[Earth LOG: 67 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing]
OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium
with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1
with a small DLX Linux;
and, for TB sometimes Libranet (Linux) 2.8.1, via Cross Over Office
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iD8DBQFBjnMc9q62QPd3XuIRAsOaAJ4tiXvLIW1okM9/6NYDbIH7lAwsqgCffWjd
VuobuKAwAH1Gdj0J1Nmu5iY=
=mVfC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Andre Wichartz]

Hello Marek,

Sunday, November 7, 2004, 4:12:33 PM, you wrote:

> TB never stored msgbases in plain text format like Netscape (Unix
> mailbox). There were two formats of msgbases, first was used until
> 1.41 version, actually used format was introduced in 1.42 version and
> is the same until 3.x.

All I know is that I can easily open and read them with a texteditor like
vi or xedit.

-- 
Best regards,
 Andre  

The Bat! v2.12.00 on Suse Linux 9.1



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[Marek Mikus]

Hello all,
Sunday, November 7, 2004, Alexander S. Kunz wrote:

>> TBB files are stored in binary format

> Do you happen to know since when that is the case, as Andre mentioned v2
> stores them as plain text... I don't really know.

TB never stored msgbases in plain text format like Netscape (Unix
mailbox). There were two formats of msgbases, first was used until
1.41 version, actually used format was introduced in 1.42 version and
is the same until 3.x.

-- 

Bye

Marek Mikus
Czech support of The Bat!
http://www.thebat.cz

Using the best The Bat! 3.0.2.5
under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1
Notebook Acer, Pentium4-M 2.2 GHz, 512 MB RAM, ADSL line

 



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello Marek Mikus & everyone else

07-Nov-2004 16:03, you wrote:

> TBB files are stored in binary format

Do you happen to know since when that is the case, as Andre mentioned v2
stores them as plain text... I don't really know.

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
 using TB! v3.0.2.5 on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2

There was never an idea started that woke men out of their stupid
indifference but its originator was spoken of as a crank. -- Oliver
Wendell Holmes



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[Marek Mikus]

Hello all,
Sunday, November 7, 2004, Alexander S. Kunz wrote:

>> It means that it checks plain text files. Because that's what *.tbb
>> files are - at least in v2.

> My .tbb files are definitely not plain text files, I just checked... they
> contain some sort of header information starting with hex code...

TBB files are stored in binary format and TB checks CRC when is
loaded. So if will any antivirus try to remove such part of this file,
it can corrupt it.

-- 

Bye

Marek Mikus
Czech support of The Bat!
http://www.thebat.cz

Using the best The Bat! 3.0.2.5
under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1
Notebook Acer, Pentium4-M 2.2 GHz, 512 MB RAM, ADSL line

 



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello Andre Wichartz & everyone else

07-Nov-2004 12:08, you wrote:

> It means that it checks plain text files. Because that's what *.tbb
> files are - at least in v2.

My .tbb files are definitely not plain text files, I just checked... they
contain some sort of header information starting with hex code...

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
 using TB! v3.0.2.5 on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then. (Bob Seger)



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Andre Wichartz]

Hello Alexander,

Saturday, November 6, 2004, 5:33:57 PM, you wrote:

> My mistake, somewhere in between the mails I started mixing things up. I
> did not mean TB's messagebase, but a unix messagebase (plain text format),
> or a .eml | .msg attachment (when exported). Those are usually covered with
> the archive support of virus scanners (at least mine does it that way, I
> can switch off the checking of mail archives however, for it is a lengthy
> process to decode all attachments).

> My virus scanner also checks TB's messagebase format (I'm using GData AVK,
> it contains the KAV and the BitDefender engine) and does find messages with
> malicious attachments that way - I don't know if thats a special feature of
> GData's AVK or if this is part of either the KAV or BD engine.

It means that it checks plain text files. Because that's what *.tbb
files are - at least in v2.

-- 
Best regards,
 Andre  

The Bat! v2.12.00 on Suse Linux 9.1



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hello P.Johnson,

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 11:49:12 -0600 GMT (07/11/2004, 00:49 +0700 GMT),
P.Johnson wrote:

PJ> Thanks Thomas, your comments have really helped.

You're welcome.

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas.

Things You Would Never Know Without the Movies: Most laptop computers
are powerful enough to override the communication systems of any
invading alien civilization.

Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build  A 





Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello Pat,

sending this off-list so people won't think I'm advertising. :-)

06-Nov-2004 18:52, you wrote:

> Can I ask what AV program you are using?

Sure. Its the GData AntiVirusKit from http://www.gdatasoftware.com (this is
their english page, the german page is http://www.gdata.de - its more
recent, already lists the new "2005" versions of their security products)

The program utilizes the Kaspersky and BitDefender engines, GData made the
GUI and additional components like POP3 scanner and (*sigh*) MS Outlook
plugin for it. I just saw they're not offering trial version downloads on
the english page, and they trial versions on the german page only come with
german GUI... *sigh2*

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
 using TB! v3.0.2.4 Rush on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2

Deliplayer2 is playing: "Coyote" by Mark Knopfler



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[P.Johnson]

Hello Alexander,
On Saturday, November 6, 2004, 11:49 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>...
ASK> Well, if you don't mind - its OK. I wouldn't like it, even though I'm on a
ASK> DSL. :) The whole update process is a bit uncomfortable. You download the
ASK> complete installation archive at least twice a month. My AV does all that
ASK> in the background without my interaction. But it isn't free, so thats the
ASK> deal maybe. :-)

>> If I would try to update it "online" it would disconnect me countless
>> times, or connection will drop in coma, the equal number of times,
>> without possibility of resuming so I'd probably have to bequeath this
>> "online" update to my progeny, using such a "method".
>...

ASK> My expectations are different that yours, thats all. I want easy & slim
ASK> automatic updates without wading into the depths of the program, activating
ASK> some scheduler & adding an event to it to get them automatically first
ASK> place, and all that... it must be easy for the end user.

Can I ask what AV program you are using?

-- 
Best wishes,
Pat

A Canadian in Houston
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[P.Johnson]

Hi Thomas,
On Saturday, November 6, 2004, 11:44 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PJ>> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
PJ>> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
PJ>> Internet Security. I am wondering if any TB! users have tried this
PJ>> suite; and more generally, if there has to be specific compatibility
PJ>> between email programs and virus software.

TF> I am using PC-Cillin and TB.

TF> Problem 1: There is no plug-in. This means that every time a virus
TF> comes, the email will not be imported into TB, as the initial bat*.tmp
TF> file will be arrested by the PCC realtime scan...
>...
TF> Problem 2: PCC (since it has no plug-in for TB) will not be able to
TF> scan mails that come in via secured connection. So the infected mails
TF> will be received by TB anyway. Again, no point...

Ack, too much trouble for the likes of me. :-) It really helps to hear
from someone who uses PCC as I had planned to, at home with TB.

>...

PJ>> "We have no answer to this question for now but you may try using your
PJ>> software but please enable the webmail scan feature.

TF> I do not know what the webmail scan feature would have to do with
TF> this.

Me either. It was altogether a silly reply from Trend to my question;
I responded to clarify and have not heard back.

Thanks Thomas, your comments have really helped.

-- 
Best wishes,
Pat

A Canadian in Houston
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hello Allie,

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 11:56:32 -0500 GMT (06/11/2004, 23:56 +0700 GMT),
Allie Martin wrote:

AM> That requires some assistance and commitment from the PC-Cillin
AM> producers. Are they interested in a plugin for TB!?

I have no idea.

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas.

Ever notice that PRICE and WORTH mean the same thing, but priceless
and worthless are opposites?  -- Jay Trachman

Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build  A 





Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Allie Martin]

On Saturday, November 06, 2004 at 11:22:52 AM [GMT -0500], Thomas
Fernandez wrote:

> Agreed. I'll wait for that plug-in for PCC though, because it is a
> very good virus and trojan scanner.

That requires some assistance and commitment from the PC-Cillin
producers. Are they interested in a plugin for TB!?

-- 
-= Allie =-
. Shotgun wedding: a case of wife or death.
__
Using The Bat!™ v3.0.2.5 for IMAP mail
IMAP Server: MDaemon Pro | OS: Windows XP Pro (Service Pack 2)






Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hello Allie,

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 11:03:23 -0500 GMT (06/11/2004, 23:03 +0700 GMT),
Allie Martin wrote:

AM> If you exclude the TB! directory and temp files, then still enabling the
AM> realtime scan wouldn't be a useless combination. Attempting to open or
AM> save an infected attachment to disk would trigger the realtime scanner.

AM> That's better than a completely manual approach. It's not useless.

OK, I didn't think about the opening right out of TB, because I don't
do that anymore. But you are right, changing my habits would make
things even easier this way.

AM> IMO, in order of effectiveness and convenience:

Agreed. I'll wait for that plug-in for PCC though, because it is a very
good virus and trojan scanner.

>> Do they know how tedious it is to reinstall everything from backup?
>> ;-)

AM> I'm referring to those who don't have to worry about viruses, like Mac
AM> and Linux users. 

I misunderstood. I thought you were talking about Windows users who
don't use any such protection at all, causing all of us receiving the
malware over and over again.

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas.

Things You Would Never Know Without the Movies: Every time a person
turns on the television to see the news, he instantly sees what he
wants and what concerns him.

Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build  A 





Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello Mica Mijatovic & everyone else

06-Nov-2004 16:20, you wrote:

>> Actually, it would be pretty bad for a virus scanner to not recognize
>> base64 or uu-encoded inline attachments in a message(base). Most do.

> KAV couldn't, NOD-32 couldn't, PC-Sillyn couldn't, F-prot couldn't...

My mistake, somewhere in between the mails I started mixing things up. I
did not mean TB's messagebase, but a unix messagebase (plain text format),
or a .eml | .msg attachment (when exported). Those are usually covered with
the archive support of virus scanners (at least mine does it that way, I
can switch off the checking of mail archives however, for it is a lengthy
process to decode all attachments).

My virus scanner also checks TB's messagebase format (I'm using GData AVK,
it contains the KAV and the BitDefender engine) and does find messages with
malicious attachments that way - I don't know if thats a special feature of
GData's AVK or if this is part of either the KAV or BD engine.

> Try this and see yourself. Put a virus file as an attachment in a new
> message, save it in Outbox, and scan the respective TBB file/the message
> base. Will show nothing. Check directly out the attachment in TB, and AV
> will react.

I don't even get that far because the scanner catches the .tmp file with
the virus... because I haven't excluded the folder where TB puts its .tmp
files... :-}

> I have to throw some turkey slices (from my Candy freezer I bought for
> about 250 Euros, for my winter [Native] American turkeys, instead Win
> XP, after I had tried it for a month or so) on the grill now. Hungry. (:
> You are welcome to participate. (-:

Thanks for the offer *g*. That would mean travelling to Serbia if I'm not
guessing all wrong, and I fear it would be a little bit too far to arrive
in time for dinner. :-)

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
 using TB! v3.0.2.4 Rush on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2

Deliplayer2 is playing: "The Last Laugh" by Mark Knopfler
 from the 2000 album 'Sailing to Philadelphia'



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Allie Martin]

On Saturday, November 06, 2004 at 10:29:17 AM [GMT -0500], Thomas
Fernandez wrote:

> Yes, I could. In fact, I excluded all file extensions by just turning
> off the darned realtime scan. But the question was about TB and PCC,
> and if the solution is to exclude the tmp files and the TB directory
> from realtime scan, the question must be answered as "useless
> combination".

If you exclude the TB! directory and temp files, then still enabling the
realtime scan wouldn't be a useless combination. Attempting to open or
save an infected attachment to disk would trigger the realtime scanner.

That's better than a completely manual approach. It's not useless.

> Yes, this is a second scenario. This way, PCC won't stop the malware
> at the tmp level, and won't arrest the folders. In fact, it would not
> interact with TB at all. Which is what was said above.

Yes. Interacting with TB!'s operations creates problems. This is why
mailscanning is offered by mose scanners today. It checks the mail
*before* TB! starts interacting with it. Scanners shouldn't interfere
once TB! begins handling the mail. Unless a plugin is doing the
interacting and TB! controls what's happening via the plugin.

> An AV program with a TB plug-in would filter the infected mails to a
> quarantine folder within TB, where you could do with them what you
> want. In my case, delete them all (except for that test message with
> Eicar), but it's in any case more convenient than manual scanning.

Yes.

IMO, in order of effectiveness and convenience:

- using plugin when available with non-specific mail scanning support
  disabled.

- if no plugin available, and you're not using an encrypted protocol,
  mail scanning while excluding the TB! directory and temp files from
  scanning.

- if no plugin available and you're using an encrypted connection, then
  disable non-specific mail scanning support, and exclude the TB!
  directories and temp file. Keep the realtime scanner running.

AM>> Afterall, some find having to worry about viruses at all to be rather
AM>> tedious. :)

> Do they know how tedious it is to reinstall everything from backup?
> ;-)

I'm referring to those who don't have to worry about viruses, like Mac
and Linux users. 

-- 
-= Allie =-
. No good deed goes unpunished - Clare Booth Luce
__
Using The Bat!™ v3.0.2.5 for IMAP mail
IMAP Server: MDaemon Pro | OS: Windows XP Pro (Service Pack 2)






Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hello Allie,

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:54:31 -0500 GMT (06/11/2004, 21:54 +0700 GMT),
Allie Martin wrote:

>> Problem 1: There is no plug-in. This means that every time a virus
>> comes, the email will not be imported into TB, as the initial bat*.tmp
>> file will be arrested by the PCC realtime scan, a

AM> Couldn't you just exclude the TB! installation and mail directories from
AM> scanning as well as the bat tmp files? There's really nothing else to
AM> exclude.

Yes, I could. In fact, I excluded all file extensions by just turning
off the darned realtime scan. But the question was about TB and PCC,
and if the solution is to exclude the tmp files and the TB directory
from realtime scan, the question must be answered as "useless
combination".

>> Problem 2: PCC (since it has no plug-in for TB) will not be able to
>> scan mails that come in via secured connection. So the infected mails
>> will be received by TB anyway. Again, no point.

AM> This is assuming you use an encrypted connection. If you don't, then
AM> excluding the temp files and the TB! directory from realtime scanning,
[...]

Yes, this is a second scenario. This way, PCC won't stop the malware
at the tmp level, and won't arrest the folders. In fact, it would not
interact with TB at all. Which is what was said above.

>> At home, I am comfortable with scanning attachments manually. Most
>> malware can be identified by sight anyway. In the office, the AV scan
>> is server-side. That's much better, IMHO.

AM> Manual scanning can be tedious, but we get accustomed to a lot.

An AV program with a TB plug-in would filter the infected mails to a
quarantine folder within TB, where you could do with them what you
want. In my case, delete them all (except for that test message with
Eicar), but it's in any case more convenient than manual scanning.

AM> Afterall, some find having to worry about viruses at all to be rather
AM> tedious. :)

Do they know how tedious it is to reinstall everything from backup?
;-)

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas.

Um zu antworten, bitte die From-Zeile mit ROT13 bearbeiten. Danach mit
MD5 hashen, zeichenweise den ASCII-Code um 2 erhoehen (mod 57) und
erneut um 63 erhoehen. Dann mit der urspruenglichen Adresse x-oren.
Schliesslich am Ergebnis erfreuen und so antworten wie gewohnt.

Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build  A 





Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Mica Mijatovic]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

   ***^\ ."_)~~
 ~( __ _"o   Was another beautiful day, Sat, 6 Nov 2004,
   @  @  at 09:57:05 +0100, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote:

>> What is "heavy" for a broadband user? I just downloaded newest version
>> of ~4,5 MB, for some 25 minutes on *dial-up*.

> Well, if you don't mind - its OK. I wouldn't like it, even though I'm
> on a DSL. :)

That's why they call you Alexander and me Mica. (-: And I like this. In
both directions. Otherwise would be boring.

> The whole update process is a bit uncomfortable. You download the
> complete installation archive at least twice a month.

Yep. Something like this. And for me is not uncomfortable, until I can
resume download (but using this way it almost never happens that
connection is interrupted for those 20-30 minutes; I don't know why...).

> My AV does all that in the background without my interaction.

There you see. While I *like* to interact with the contraption. (:

> But it isn't free, so thats the deal maybe. :-)

Yep. It is, of course, and often, and especially in the world of
software. The fact is that the price does not guarantee any quality. If
it would be different, I wouldn't buy a Candy freezer for my winter
(Native) American turkeys for about 250 Euros, instead Win XP, after I
had tried it for a month or so. (-: Man, the freezer is of 110 liters
and is full of turkeys (just two of them). I have a winter food,
something I can *remember*, and enjoy in.

Investing, that way, in software is very risky. And often silly.

>> If I would try to update it "online" it would disconnect me countless
>> times, or connection will drop in coma, the equal number of times,
>> without possibility of resuming so I'd probably have to bequeath this
>> "online" update to my progeny, using such a "method".

> Yes, their update servers are overloaded very often... which is perfectly
> understandable because they preserve their bandwidth for their paying home
> & business users.

Hmm... IMO, *no* AV is that good that should be paid for.


>> And above all, I would have firstly to *provide* some progeny. You must
>> admit, therefore, that what you subtly foreshadow has no all pros and
>> cons modestly equilibrated. (Today, we are string walkers.)

> My expectations are different that yours, thats all. I want easy & slim
> automatic updates without wading into the depths of the program, activating
> some scheduler & adding an event to it to get them automatically first
> place, and all that... it must be easy for the end user. You're an
> experienced end-user and you don't care to be bothered by long downloads
> and manual updates. Thats OK, but there's others who don't think like you.

I am all the time aware of it. (: That's the reason we exchange our
experiences and each person can choose and apply the preferred way.

 There are plenty of good AV programs

>>> Actually, there are not. :) Usually less than 50% of tested AV software
>>> reach 100% detection rate...

>> I wholelungsly suspect that even ONE AV on this beautiful world in this
>> part of galaxy can do that. What we read in newspapers mainly does not
>> exist.

> So you rely on vague statements like "there are plenty of good AV
> programs" made on some mailing list?

:) Quite contrarily, this statement of mine, I exposed on a mailing
list, comes from experience I had with AV programs, which I rely on.

> I prefer programs to be tested in an equal environment... that
> environment may be different with each test, but it shows performers
> and non-performers.

Agree. That's the experience.

>> "Encrypted channels"? What's that? Teach me. Please. (:

> Using an SSL-encrypted POP3 or IMAP connection to your mailserver for
> security and/or privacy reasons.

Ah, that. OK. Thanks.

>> Btw, once a single message is in a message base (files TBB) no AV will be
>> able to recognize any virus, since all of them (if attachments are
>> stored in same file) are then in plain text format. (-; Catch-22.

> Actually, it would be pretty bad for a virus scanner to not recognize
> base64 or uu-encoded inline attachments in a message(base). Most do.

KAV couldn't, NOD-32 couldn't, PC-Sillyn couldn't, F-prot couldn't...
Try this and see yourself. Put a virus file as an attachment in a new
message, save it in Outbox, and scan the respective TBB file/the message
base. Will show nothing. Check directly out the attachment in TB, and AV
will react.

I have to throw some turkey slices (from my Candy freezer I bought for
about 250 Euros, for my winter [Native] American turkeys, instead Win
XP, after I had tried it for a month or so) on the grill now. Hungry. (:
You are welcome to participate. (-:

- --
Mica
PGP key uploaded at:  once just before breakfast
:happypiglet:
[Earth LOG: 66 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing]
OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium
with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux;
and, for TB sometimes 

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Mica Mijatovic]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

   ***^\ ."_)~~
 ~( __ _"o   Was another beautiful day, Sat, 6 Nov 2004,
   @  @  at 01:33:38 +, when MFPA wrote:


> Hi

> On Friday, 5 November, 2004, at 8:54:35 PM, Mica Mijatovic wrote:

>> So, it's good then to keep all attachments separately. *Then* you
>> can check them for viruses successfully, even if they are not
>> open in TB.

> from TB help file: "Attachments stored separately from message
> bodies may not get moved between account folders if a message body
> is moved."

> Is this still true?

I don't know. They say the message and the respective file will stay "in
touch", that is "linked". Seems to me then that it is not of a general
meaning (there are these exceptions with moving between accounts). I
hesitated to use this feature, since I preferred to have the single
message in its "original state". But on the other side, this way is
better for the virus scan. And additionally, is better for getting
smaller message base, if we receive lots of bigger attachments, in a
period.

Although there is a way to "over"-menage that, by adding a "description"
to each attachment stored separately (let's say by name of sender). In
Total Commander you can do that (Ctrl+Z), and the descriptions will be
stored in the "descript.ion" files, which can be rummaged then by search
utility, or just by mouse-over moves.

- --
Mica
PGP key uploaded at:  once just before breakfast
:happypiglet:
[Earth LOG: 66 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing]
OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium
with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux;
and, for TB sometimes Libranet (Linux) 2.8.1, via Cross Over Office
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iD8DBQFBjNo29q62QPd3XuIRAtt5AKCcO7JElaHJEO2ydFmrhOgGe6qpugCePREe
gqXVv/Q1winb5htT0SSmrLk=
=DIzQ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Allie Martin]

On Saturday, November 06, 2004 at 9:22:01 AM [GMT -0500], Thomas
Fernandez wrote:

> I am using PC-Cillin and TB.

> Problem 1: There is no plug-in. This means that every time a virus
> comes, the email will not be imported into TB, as the initial bat*.tmp
> file will be arrested by the PCC realtime scan, and the infected mail
> will be downloaded each time again (and the *.tmp file arrested so the
> mail cannot be imported into TB) until I delete it manually from the
> server. There probably is a way to exclude *.tmp files from scanning,
> but what then is the purpose?

It's not all the time that real-time scanning and locking of files is a
good thing. This is why decent AV programs will support the exclusion of
objects, filetypes and directories from realtime scanning. You can
safely prevent the scanning of TB! temp files since the virus will be
caught later.

> The infected mails will still be imported into TB, but now PCC will
> arrest the whole folder when I try to open it! 

In this case, I'd exclude the TB! directory from realtime scanning. I
have done so here, even though I'm yet to experience that horrid effect.

> Had some funny "disappearing all mails in a folder" issues over that a
> few years back. So I decided to disable the realtime scan, and I
> manually scan any suspicious attachments before I open them.

Couldn't you just exclude the TB! installation and mail directories from
scanning as well as the bat tmp files? There's really nothing else to
exclude.

> Problem 2: PCC (since it has no plug-in for TB) will not be able to
> scan mails that come in via secured connection. So the infected mails
> will be received by TB anyway. Again, no point.

This is assuming you use an encrypted connection. If you don't, then
excluding the temp files and the TB! directory from realtime scanning,
as well as enabling mail scanning should prevent the locking of temp
files and entire mailbases while checking mail as they come in. I assume
PCCillin has a mailscanner. I'm also assuming PC-Cillin allows file and
directory exlusions from realtime and manual scans. If PC-Cillin doesn't
allow this flexibility, then I'd certainly not recommend it as a
solution. There are too many decent scanners out there to choose from
and which all allow that flexibility.

> At home, I am comfortable with scanning attachments manually. Most
> malware can be identified by sight anyway. In the office, the AV scan
> is server-side. That's much better, IMHO.

Manual scanning can be tedious, but we get accustomed to a lot.

Afterall, some find having to worry about viruses at all to be rather
tedious. :)


-- 
-= Allie =-
. Fraud(n): A telephone number starting with 1-900
__
Using The Bat!™ v3.0.2.5 for IMAP mail
IMAP Server: MDaemon Pro | OS: Windows XP Pro (Service Pack 2)






Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hello P.Johnson,

On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:03:59 -0600 GMT (05/11/2004, 06:03 +0700 GMT),
P.Johnson wrote:

PJ> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
PJ> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
PJ> Internet Security. I am wondering if any TB! users have tried this
PJ> suite; and more generally, if there has to be specific compatibility
PJ> between email programs and virus software.

I am using PC-Cillin and TB.

Problem 1: There is no plug-in. This means that every time a virus
comes, the email will not be imported into TB, as the initial bat*.tmp
file will be arrested by the PCC realtime scan, and the infected mail
will be downloaded each time again (and the *.tmp file arrested so the
mail cannot be imported into TB) until I delete it manually from the
server. There probably is a way to exclude *.tmp files from scanning,
but what then is the purpose? The infected mails will still be
imported into TB, but now PCC will arrest the whole folder when I try
to open it! Had some funny "disappearing all mails in a folder" issues
over that a few years back. So I decided to disable the realtime scan,
and I manually scan any suspicious attachments before I open them.

Problem 2: PCC (since it has no plug-in for TB) will not be able to
scan mails that come in via secured connection. So the infected mails
will be received by TB anyway. Again, no point.

At home, I am comfortable with scanning attachments manually. Most
malware can be identified by sight anyway. In the office, the AV scan
is server-side. That's much better, IMHO.

PJ> "We have no answer to this question for now but you may try using your
PJ> software but please enable the webmail scan feature.

I do not know what the webmail scan feature would have to do with
this.

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas.

Drink wet cement: Get Stoned.

Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build  A 





Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello Mica again & everyone else

05-Nov-2004 21:54, you wrote:

>>> One of such ones is AntiVir (Personal Edition, which is free) I use

>> ...OTOH it is very "heavy" on the online updates (I never saw an update

> What is "heavy" for a broadband user? I just downloaded newest version
> of ~4,5 MB, for some 25 minutes on *dial-up*.

Well, if you don't mind - its OK. I wouldn't like it, even though I'm on a
DSL. :) The whole update process is a bit uncomfortable. You download the
complete installation archive at least twice a month. My AV does all that
in the background without my interaction. But it isn't free, so thats the
deal maybe. :-)


> If I would try to update it "online" it would disconnect me countless
> times, or connection will drop in coma, the equal number of times,
> without possibility of resuming so I'd probably have to bequeath this
> "online" update to my progeny, using such a "method".

Yes, their update servers are overloaded very often... which is perfectly
understandable because they preserve their bandwidth for their paying home
& business users.


> And above all, I would have firstly to *provide* some progeny. You must
> admit, therefore, that what you subtly foreshadow has no all pros and
> cons modestly equilibrated. (Today, we are string walkers.)

My expectations are different that yours, thats all. I want easy & slim
automatic updates without wading into the depths of the program, activating
some scheduler & adding an event to it to get them automatically first
place, and all that... it must be easy for the end user. You're an
experienced end-user and you don't care to be bothered by long downloads
and manual updates. Thats OK, but there's others who don't think like you.


>>> There are plenty of good AV programs

>> Actually, there are not. :) Usually less than 50% of tested AV software
>> reach 100% detection rate...

> I wholelungsly suspect that even ONE AV on this beautiful world in this
> part of galaxy can do that. What we read in newspapers mainly does not
> exist.

So you rely on vague statements like "there are plenty of good AV programs"
made on some mailing list? I prefer programs to be tested in an equal
environment... that environment may be different with each test, but it
shows performers and non-performers.


> "Encrypted channels"? What's that? Teach me. Please. (:

Using an SSL-encrypted POP3 or IMAP connection to your mailserver for
security and/or privacy reasons.


> Btw, once a single message is in a message base (files TBB) no AV will be
> able to recognize any virus, since all of them (if attachments are
> stored in same file) are then in plain text format. (-; Catch-22.

Actually, it would be pretty bad for a virus scanner to not recognize
base64 or uu-encoded inline attachments in a message(base). Most do.

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
 using TB! v3.0.2.4 Rush on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2

Deliplayer2 is playing: "Impossible Lands" by Entheogenic
 from the  album '3D Vision Relax Module 01'



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[MFPA]

Hi

On Friday, 5 November, 2004, at 5:10:36 PM, P.Johnson wrote:


> The Kaspersky site says there is a plugin for TB!, but did say version
> 1.x and up, which doesn't exactly build confidence. :-)

Just for comparison: "To install AVG plugin, a version 1.60 (or
newer) of The Bat! is required. The previous versions don't
contain a support of anti-virus plugins."

-- 
Best regards,
 
MFPAmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[MFPA]

Hi

On Friday, 5 November, 2004, at 8:54:35 PM, Mica Mijatovic wrote:

> So, it's good then to keep all attachments separately. *Then* you
> can check them for viruses successfully, even if they are not
> open in TB.

from TB help file: "Attachments stored separately from message
bodies may not get moved between account folders if a message body
is moved."

Is this still true?

-- 
Best regards,
 
MFPAmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Mica Mijatovic]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

   ***^\ ."_)~~
 ~( __ _"o   Was another beautiful day, Fri, 5 Nov 2004,
   @  @  at 11:25:05 -0600, when P.Johnson wrote:

MM>>  One of such ones is AntiVir (Personal Edition,
MM>> which is free) I use often, and it (the "Guard" part of it) will react
MM>> on ANY occurrence which involves a "suspicious" file/action.

> I haven't heard of this one!

Sorry, I forgot link:  is home page. Also there is info at
, and direct d/l link (I just have installed the newest
version) is this: 
Size: 4364KB


MM>> And although I have pretty tight selective download filters, here
MM>> and there AntiVir is catching some infected file, and asks me for
MM>> action I'd prefer (renaming, deleting, denying/allowing access
MM>> etc.). It does that very fast, so you can proceed download of other
MM>> messages of that account, "on the fly".

> ...as long as you don't have to be too techie to run the software
> efficiently?

TB is much more techie. (-:

After all, you may try it and see yourself if it fits your needs. (:

- --
Mica
PGP key uploaded at:  once just before breakfast
<>o<>
[Earth LOG: 65 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing]
OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium
with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux;
and, for TB sometimes Libranet (Linux) 2.8.1, via Cross Over Office
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iD8DBQFBjAQc9q62QPd3XuIRAsBdAJ4lY+2O5lhMBUEJAmjCoEIkwDni2ACeJ3uH
8S7VrWo6YIVG9aGofk7KwuA=
=m4LS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Mica Mijatovic]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

   ***^\ ."_)~~
 ~( __ _"o   Was another beautiful day, Fri, 5 Nov 2004,
   @  @  at 19:43:37 +0100, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote:

> Hello Mica Mijatovic & everyone else

Glad to see you. (:

> 05-Nov-2004 14:19, you wrote:

>> One of such ones is AntiVir (Personal Edition, which is free) I use
>> often, and it (the "Guard" part of it) will react on ANY occurrence
>> which involves a "suspicious" file/action. It is *very light* in
>> spending resources whilst it monitors machine.

> ...OTOH it is very "heavy" on the online updates (I never saw an update
> below 1MB), and the way to set the online update in a way that it will
> happen automatically is to be found only by the more curious users.

What is "heavy" for a broadband user? I just downloaded newest version
of ~4,5 MB, for some 25 minutes on *dial-up*. If I would try to update
it "online" it would disconnect me countless times, or connection will
drop in coma, the equal number of times, without possibility of resuming
so I'd probably have to bequeath this "online" update to my progeny,
using such a "method".

And above all, I would have firstly to *provide* some progeny. You must
admit, therefore, that what you subtly foreshadow has no all pros and
cons modestly equilibrated. (Today, we are string walkers.)


>> There are plenty of good AV programs

> Actually, there are not. :) Usually less than 50% of tested AV software
> reach 100% detection rate...

I wholelungsly suspect that even ONE AV on this beautiful world in this
part of galaxy can do that. What we read in newspapers mainly does not
exist. There is NO any AV which will catch "100%" of anything something.
That's the reason I used term "good" instead "perfect", and further,
that's the reason why people use more than one AV, for various sorts of
(digital) beasts, for the raids from left, right, back... Under... You
have to have *strategy*. You cannot just "buy a gun" and that's all.
What's one gun for all of that growing populace.

If those beast are so easily scared, we could kill them by frowning.

.

> It can be an advantage to have an email plugin, as it is outlined in
> TB's helpfile, too (search the index for "anti-virus"): it may detect
> malware in email that comes via encrypted channels, too, where normal
> mail scanners fail, for example.

"Encrypted channels"? What's that? Teach me. Please. (:

> In addition, there are antivirus programs which are simply not aware
> of all email programs and their database files. Imagine an antivirus
> program that detects a virus signature in a large email folder (where
> the virus does absolutely no harm) and it quarantines the whole file,
> or, if the scanner is configured more strict, deletes the whole folder
> at once. Surprise surprise - all mails gone.

Surprise, surprise - you didn't follow my exposure. (: Pat, pat. I'll be
shameless and will cite myself: "...AntiVir is catching some infected file,
and asks me for action I'd prefer (renaming, deleting, denying/allowing
access etc.). It does that very fast, so you can proceed download of
other messages of that account..."

"...so you can proceed download of other messages of that account" --
"other" and "messages"; therefore it intercepts single messages *before*
they become a part of any folder or whatever database, if they are of a
such fate, therefore before they even *arrive* in TB.

So, the suspicious message wants to come in, and AntiVir says: "No!
Stop! You can't get in since you are suspicious. I have to ask the Boss
(it's Me) firstly." And only if I allow that, this single message is
entering and is becoming the part of some folder or whatever, by its
respective merit.

> My strategy is to completely exclude the mail programs data folders
> from both the on-access and on-demand scanning, and have the mails
> scanned separately (if at all, I do not) - if you click on a malicious
> attachment and try to execute and/or save it, the on-access scanner
> will catch it, anyway. YMMV

Your strategy is also good, but Miss Pat asked for an AV which will *also*
check the incoming mail, when it yet consists from separate single
messages, before they become the part of a data folders. She then will
have many opportunities to click on them as well. AntiVir can do that
too.

Btw, once a single message is in a message base (files TBB) no AV will
be able to recognize any virus, since all of them (if attachments are
stored in same file) are then in plain text format. (-; Catch-22. So,
it's good then to keep all attachments separately. *Then* you can check
them for viruses successfully, even if they are not open in TB.

What are those "encrypted channels"? Do I have some of these?

- --
Mica
PGP key uploaded at:  once just before breakfast
<>o<>
[Earth LOG: 65 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing]
OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium
with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux;
and, for TB s

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello Mica Mijatovic & everyone else

05-Nov-2004 14:19, you wrote:

> One of such ones is AntiVir (Personal Edition, which is free) I use
> often, and it (the "Guard" part of it) will react on ANY occurrence which
> involves a "suspicious" file/action. It is *very light* in spending
> resources whilst it monitors machine.

...OTOH it is very "heavy" on the online updates (I never saw an update
below 1MB), and the way to set the online update in a way that it will
happen automatically is to be found only by the more curious users.


> There are plenty of good AV programs

Actually, there are not. :) Usually less than 50% of tested AV software
reach 100% detection rate...


> so is not very grateful to say which one is "best", but basically those
> which are able to function "independently", that is to treat all
> files/occurrences "equally", using no special "plug-in" (which requires
> some sort of "integration" with a particular application, which, further,
> might be a cause of possible "complications"), are most reliable.

It can be an advantage to have an email plugin, as it is outlined in TB's
helpfile, too (search the index for "anti-virus"): it may detect malware in
email that comes via encrypted channels, too, where normal mail scanners
fail, for example.

In addition, there are antivirus programs which are simply not aware of all
email programs and their database files. Imagine an antivirus program that
detects a virus signature in a large email folder (where the virus does
absolutely no harm) and it quarantines the whole file, or, if the scanner
is configured more strict, deletes the whole folder at once. Surprise
surprise - all mails gone.

My strategy is to completely exclude the mail programs data folders from
both the on-access and on-demand scanning, and have the mails scanned
separately (if at all, I do not) - if you click on a malicious attachment
and try to execute and/or save it, the on-access scanner will catch it,
anyway. YMMV

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
 using TB! v3.0.2.4 Rush on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2

A person starts to live when he can live outside himself. -- Albert
Einstein



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[P.Johnson]

Hi Mica,
On Friday, November 5, 2004, 11:18 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
>> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
>> Internet Security. I am wondering if any TB! users have tried this
>> suite; and more generally, if there has to be specific compatibility
>> between email programs and virus software.
>> On the Trend site, under System Requirements, email, The Bat! is not
>> listed...

MM> You simply could try some AV which is not at all specifically
MM> tied/dedicated to e-mail traffic; simply an engine which will treat ALL
MM> sorts of activities in the same way, controlling *everything* what
MM> happens to your machine - *including* mail traffic (without any need for
MM> a dedicated "plug-in").

That is exactly what I am looking for, but of course want the email
scan included, as you say. Plug in not necessary.

MM>  One of such ones is AntiVir (Personal Edition,
MM> which is free) I use often, and it (the "Guard" part of it) will react
MM> on ANY occurrence which involves a "suspicious" file/action.

I haven't heard of this one!

MM> It is *very
MM> light* in spending resources whilst it monitors machine.

That I like very much.

MM> And although I
MM> have pretty tight selective download filters, here and there AntiVir is
MM> catching some infected file, and asks me for action I'd prefer
MM> (renaming, deleting, denying/allowing access etc.). It does that very
MM> fast, so you can proceed download of other messages of that account, "on
MM> the fly".

...as long as you don't have to be too techie to run the software
efficiently?

MM> There are plenty of good AV programs, so is not very grateful to say
MM> which one is "best", but basically those which are able to function
MM> "independently", that is to treat all files/occurrences "equally", using
MM> no special "plug-in" (which requires some sort of "integration" with a
MM> particular application, which, further, might be a cause of possible
MM> "complications"), are most reliable.

Yes I think you are right; sometimes the "convenience" of a plug in
turns out to be a major headache instead, and needless since most
virus programs will scan without the integration.

Thank you very much, Mica!

-- 
Best wishes,
Pat

A Canadian in Houston
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[P.Johnson]

Hi Michael,
On Thursday, November 4, 2004, 11:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PJ>> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
PJ>> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
PJ>> Internet Security. I am wondering if any TB! users have tried this
PJ>> suite; and more generally, if there has to be specific compatibility
PJ>> between email programs and virus software.

MR> I use Trend OfficeScan, which has the same or similar engine to
MR> PC-Cillin. I had to manually change my Account Properties so that the
MR> mail server was 'localhost' and the user was of the format
MR> 'xxx%domain.com/pop.domain.com'. It's not as integrated as the
MR> programs that work directly with TheBat! but the other features of the
MR> product are nice.

Did Trend provide instructions for changing your Account Properties?
(They sound similar to the changes I made when using SpamPal.)
Otherwise, you don't have a problem with OfficeScan shutting down TB!,
like Leo did?

Still, since the support at Trend was less than helpful, I may have to
give the product a pass (that is, a fail :-)).

I appreciate your help!

-- 
Best wishes,
Pat

A Canadian in Houston
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[P.Johnson]

Hi Mary,
On Thursday, November 4, 2004, 11:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PJ>> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and
PJ>> virus protection I can,

MB> Pat, I have had no problems with F-Secure.
MB> http://www.f-secure.com/

There are so many! ... but as I said in an earlier post, I was (for
some reason) looking for a combination anit-virus/firewall product and
f-secure also fits the bill.

MB> I am using only its AV (it now offers a suite, new this year, with
MB> firewall) and I have just renewed my license, after one year's use.
MB> The interface is friendly and it has the advantage of combining 3
MB> separate virus-scanning engines. XP SP2 recognizes it. There's no
MB> plug-in for TB!, but that's not necessary. F-Secure recognizes an
MB> e-mail infection as it is being downloaded. It recognizes an infected
MB> file as soon as it's clicked on.
MB> For my firewall I'm using the free Sygate. Just upgraded to the latest
MB> one. I like it for its simple user interface, also.

Sygate gets good reviews too.

MB> But WilWilWil has a good set-up, too, with the free anti-virus program
MB> AVG--which *does* have a plug-in for TB!--and Kerio as firewall. I
MB> used AVG for about six months. Left it for Kaspersky (KAV), because
MB> Kaspersky updated more often.

I am currently using AVG free version and it seems to work well,
though in those comparison charts is not as aggressive as some
anti-virus programs. On the other hand, I've been looking at those
charts so much I've gone cross-eyed.

MB> Kaspersky's interface I found quite
MB> complicated. And it no longer supports The Bat! with a plug-in. Last
MB> November I moved to F-Secure. It can be set to check automatically for
MB> updates as often as you like. Virus Definitions are usually updated
MB> daily, but sometimes more often.

The Kaspersky site says there is a plugin for TB!, but did say version
1.x and up, which doesn't exactly build confidence. :-)

MB> The question of choosing an AV and a firewall to go with TB! comes up
MB> rather often on tbudl. You might try a search on the Gmane archives
MB> for more opinions.

I know this topic comes up a lot, and really only wanted someone to
say "PC-cillin works PERFECTLY with The Bat!". But since it doesn't
the info I've received has been helpful, and I really am sorry to open
up this discussion again. I would insert the appropriate smiley here,
but that's another discussion left alone for awhile! :-) <--oops.

Thanks Mary, for your always helpful comments.

-- 
Best wishes,
Pat

A Canadian in Houston
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[P.Johnson]

Hi Alexander,
On Friday, November 5, 2004, 10:55 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
>> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
>> Internet Security.

ASK> Do you have a reason to look at this specific product?

I read a very good review of the product; also wanted to try a bundled
virus/firewall.

ASK> AFAIK there's a Kaspersky AV plugin available for TheBat -

Yes, I visited the Kaspersky site and there is a plugin available.

ASK> Firewall - well, the best firewall is air. The air thats between the
ASK> plug and the socket when you pull the cable of your internet
ASK> connection. :)

Pull the... cable?? Disconnect???

ASK> OK, joking aside...

Whew. :-))

ASK>  the "personal firewall" that runs on the very same
ASK> machine it should protect is subject to lengthy discussions for a
ASK> while. However, I do see a benefit from using this kind of software,
ASK> so here's my two cents:...
ASK> #1 is the real security issue, and the built-in firewall of Win XP
ASK> (SP2) is good enough for that, period. #2 is a privacy issue - and
ASK> you'll need a separate product for that. There's a couple of freeware
ASK> "personal firewall" solutions, and I would use one of them (Tiny
ASK> Personal Firewall, Sygate, Outpost...).

Yes, I was hoping to install something like the PC-cillin suite and
not have to go "shopping". Oh well!

Thanks very much for your comments.

-- 
Best wishes,
Pat

A Canadian in Houston
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[3]: PC-cillin and TB!

[P.Johnson]

Hello WilWilWil,
On Thursday, November 4, 2004, 10:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LL>> ...The problem is, that when the Bat stores
LL>> this virus attachment on disk, the OfficeScan pops up saying it's a virus.
LL>> For some reason TheBat cannot continue operation (I guess because
LL>> OfficeScan takes over the file for quarantine or smth), and the message is
LL>> not deleted on the server. This means that every 5 minutes (my polling
LL>> period) I get this message and have to delete the e-mail manually on the
LL>> server.

W>...I had the same problem when testing KAV personal Pro 5 with TB3 !
W> TB3 froze because KAV blocked some TB databases files. It was
W> very annoying. That why I 've chosen AVG 7. Now viruses are great
W> managed and moved to quarantine without perturbation.
 W> And for firewall I use Kerio Personal Firewall 4. It's free and
W> work well with my system (AVG / Ad-Aware 6 / TB3).

I currently use ZA Pro and AVG free and am not 100% happy with either.
I'll have a look at Kerio.

Thanks for your help.

-- 
Best wishes,
Pat

A Canadian in Houston
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[P.Johnson]

Hello Leo,
On Thursday, November 4, 2004, 10:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
>> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
>> Internet Security. I am wondering if any TB! users have tried this
>> suite; and more generally, if there has to be specific compatibility
>> between email programs and virus software.

LL> I have a Trend Micro Office Suite mandatory at work, including the laptop
LL> which runs The Bat (1.x) for my private mail. I receive a lot of spam, and
LL> some of it is virus-infected. The problem is, that when the Bat stores
LL> this virus attachment on disk, the OfficeScan pops up saying it's a virus.
LL> For some reason TheBat cannot continue operation (I guess because 
LL> OfficeScan takes over the file for quarantine or smth), and the message is
LL> not deleted on the server. This means that every 5 minutes (my polling
LL> period) I get this message and have to delete the e-mail manually on the
LL> server.

So TB mail is scanned; but Trend then is alerted to the virus which TB
has isolated. Not good. I wonder if there would be any difference in
the Home edition, and with TB v3.x.

Thanks for the information!

-- 
Best wishes,
Pat

A Canadian in Houston
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Anti-Virus Programs that work with TB! [was Re: PC-cillin and TB!]

[Mary Bull]

Hello Ivan!

On Friday, November 05, 2004, 8:35 AM, you wrote:

MB>> Kaspersky and TB! are no longer compatible

I> As I heard TheBat can work with KAV 4,5 - 5 (Personal)
I> via new plug-in klav 4.0.1.19

I> 
http://www.thebatworld.de/modules/download/index.php?op=viewlinkdetails&lid=44&ttitle=Kaspersky_Pro_AV_Plugin_4.0.1.19_%28KAV_4.x%2F5.x%29
I> http://www.batboard.net/index.php?showtopic=2516&st=0

Is it not still in the testing phase? (Second URL).

One work-around told on tbbeta was to install the KAV 4.xx plug-in on
TB! v. 2.xx and then upgrade to TB! v. 3.xx, in which case the KAV
4.xx plug-in is conserved.

Seems like a lot of trouble, when AVG is still a viable (with a free
option) alternative, and when F-Secure 2005 works perfectly with TB!
with no plug-in. (I'm using F-Secure--but I have no interest in the
company beyond being a customer. :) )

-- 
Best regards,
Mary
The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2







Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[Ivan]

Hello, Mary.

> Kaspersky and TB! are no longer compatible
As I heard TheBat can work with KAV 4,5 - 5 (Personal)
via new plug-in klav 4.0.1.19

http://www.thebatworld.de/modules/download/index.php?op=viewlinkdetails&lid=44&ttitle=Kaspersky_Pro_AV_Plugin_4.0.1.19_%28KAV_4.x%2F5.x%29
http://www.batboard.net/index.php?showtopic=2516&st=0

-- 
Best regards,
Ivan



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Mary Bull]

Hello WilWilWil!

On Thursday, November 04, 2004, 6:15 PM, you wrote, in part:

W> I had the same problem when testing KAV personal Pro 5 with TB3 !

W> TB3 froze because KAV blocked some TB databases files. It was very
W> annoying. That why I 've chosen AVG 7. Now viruses are great
W> managed and moved to quarantine without perturbation.

There's been a thread on tbbeta about the incompatibility of Kaspersky
versions 5.xx with TB! versions 3.xx. This was in early to
mid-October, 2004.

Kaspersky and TB! are no longer compatible--the plug-in to TB! will
not be further developed to make it compatible, according to this
thread, in which some of the RitLabs programmers partcipated.

-- 
Best regards,
Mary
The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2







Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Mica Mijatovic]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

   ***^\ ."_)~~
 ~( __ _"o   Was another beautiful day, Thu, 4 Nov 2004,
   @  @  at 17:03:59 -0600, when P.Johnson wrote:

> Hello,

> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
> Internet Security. I am wondering if any TB! users have tried this
> suite; and more generally, if there has to be specific compatibility
> between email programs and virus software.

> On the Trend site, under System Requirements, email, The Bat! is not
> listed. I asked whether PC-cillin would scan my TB! mail, and got this
> reply:

> "We have no answer to this question for now but you may try using your
> software but please enable the webmail scan feature. If you experience
> any problems, please do not hesitate to write us.
> Hope this helps."

> Hmmm.

Yah.

You simply could try some AV which is not at all specifically
tied/dedicated to e-mail traffic; simply an engine which will treat ALL
sorts of activities in the same way, controlling *everything* what
happens to your machine - *including* mail traffic (without any need for
a dedicated "plug-in"). One of such ones is AntiVir (Personal Edition,
which is free) I use often, and it (the "Guard" part of it) will react
on ANY occurrence which involves a "suspicious" file/action. It is *very
light* in spending resources whilst it monitors machine. And although I
have pretty tight selective download filters, here and there AntiVir is
catching some infected file, and asks me for action I'd prefer
(renaming, deleting, denying/allowing access etc.). It does that very
fast, so you can proceed download of other messages of that account, "on
the fly".

It will react even if just a single *component* used for building a
viruses, trojans etc. is found in a file, warning you about possible
"hazard" such file can cause. (The example is when a program for
revealing passwords is shown in a file manager; such program is NOT a
virus/trojan, but has some components used for building them. Another
example are shareware programs having components for "phoning home",
etc.)

There are plenty of good AV programs, so is not very grateful to say
which one is "best", but basically those which are able to function
"independently", that is to treat all files/occurrences "equally", using
no special "plug-in" (which requires some sort of "integration" with a
particular application, which, further, might be a cause of possible
"complications"), are most reliable.

- --
Mica
PGP key uploaded at:  once just before breakfast
:flagmica:
[Earth LOG: 65 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing]
OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium
with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux;
and, for TB sometimes Libranet (Linux) 2.8.1, via Cross Over Office
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iD8DBQFBi33K9q62QPd3XuIRAvOlAJ9wyZXts8/6EV6MmKMLPQSihTq1CQCgiNOJ
QuWZ1sQnaijGpiK5nx3rMgA=
=Kc4Q
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello P.Johnson,

Friday, November 5, 2004, 12:03:59 AM, you wrote:

> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
> Internet Security.

Do you have a reason to look at this specific product?

As for Antivirus Software - the Kaspersky Labs Antivirus has
repeatedly won quite some tests, its the AV solution I'd go for if I
already wouldn't use another product (which uses the Kasperky AV
engine *g*).

AFAIK there's a Kaspersky AV plugin available for TheBat - this has a
couple of advantages: you don't need to use a local proxy or POP
scanner, you can exclude TB's mail dir from the filesystem realtime
protection (and thus won't have the AV program possibly lock out TB
from its own database, and it will increase the speed of TB as well).
that sort of thing.

Firewall - well, the best firewall is air. The air thats between the
plug and the socket when you pull the cable of your internet
connection. :)

OK, joking aside... the "personal firewall" that runs on the very same
machine it should protect is subject to lengthy discussions for a
while. However, I do see a benefit from using this kind of software,
so here's my two cents:

There's two ways to look at a firewall - #1 control whats going *IN*
to your computer, and #2 control what wants to go *OUT* from your
computer (which programs want to "phone home", that sort of thing).

#1 is the real security issue, and the built-in firewall of Win XP
(SP2) is good enough for that, period. #2 is a privacy issue - and
you'll need a separate product for that. There's a couple of freeware
"personal firewall" solutions, and I would use one of them (Tiny
Personal Firewall, Sygate, Outpost...).

HTH

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexandermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Mary Bull]

Hello Pat!

On Thursday, November 04, 2004, 5:03 PM, you wrote:

PJ> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and
PJ> virus protection I can,

Pat, I have had no problems with F-Secure.

http://www.f-secure.com/

I am using only its AV (it now offers a suite, new this year, with
firewall) and I have just renewed my license, after one year's use.
The interface is friendly and it has the advantage of combining 3
separate virus-scanning engines. XP SP2 recognizes it. There's no
plug-in for TB!, but that's not necessary. F-Secure recognizes an
e-mail infection as it is being downloaded. It recognizes an infected
file as soon as it's clicked on.

For my firewall I'm using the free Sygate. Just upgraded to the latest
one. I like it for its simple user interface, also.

But WilWilWil has a good set-up, too, with the free anti-virus program
AVG--which *does* have a plug-in for TB!--and Kerio as firewall. I
used AVG for about six months. Left it for Kaspersky (KAV), because
Kaspersky updated more often. Kaspersky's interface I found quite
complicated. And it no longer supports The Bat! with a plug-in. Last
November I moved to F-Secure. It can be set to check automatically for
updates as often as you like. Virus Definitions are usually updated
daily, but sometimes more often.

The question of choosing an AV and a firewall to go with TB! comes up
rather often on tbudl. You might try a search on the Gmane archives
for more opinions.

-- 
Best regards,
Mary
The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2







Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[Jason Grunstra]

You might want to try a server based spam/virus filter. At our company we use 
Sentinare PostGuard www.sentinare.com so that spam/viruses are trapped on the server 
level, so that they don't waste time/resources downloading and scanning garbage emails.

They have a easy web-based quarantine interface in case you need to rescue a message, 
but it's rare that you have to. They use SpamAssassian and some other filters to get 
really good accuracy, my account at work is 99.6% accurate.

-Jason


===Original message text===
From: Leo Landa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thursday, November 4, 2004, 3:58:12 PM
Subject: PC-cillin and TB!


On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, P.Johnson wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
> Internet Security. I am wondering if any TB! users have tried this
> suite; and more generally, if there has to be specific compatibility
> between email programs and virus software.

I have a Trend Micro Office Suite mandatory at work, including the laptop 
which runs The Bat (1.x) for my private mail. I receive a lot of spam, and 
some of it is virus-infected. The problem is, that when the Bat stores 
this virus attachment on disk, the OfficeScan pops up saying it's a virus. 
For some reason TheBat cannot continue operation (I guess because 
OfficeScan takes over the file for quarantine or smth), and the message is 
not deleted on the server. This means that every 5 minutes (my polling 
period) I get this message and have to delete the e-mail manually on the 
server.

Plus, all our admins receive a virus warning.

Hence, I have been asked to remove The Bat.

Just my experience - those problems may be obsolete by now.

Leo.




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
End of original message text===



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: PC-cillin and TB!

[WilWilWil]

LL> I have a Trend Micro Office Suite mandatory at work, including the laptop 
LL> which runs The Bat (1.x) for my private mail. I receive a lot of spam, and 
LL> some of it is virus-infected. The problem is, that when the Bat stores 
LL> this virus attachment on disk, the OfficeScan pops up saying it's a virus. 
LL> For some reason TheBat cannot continue operation (I guess because 
LL> OfficeScan takes over the file for quarantine or smth), and the message is 
LL> not deleted on the server. This means that every 5 minutes (my polling 
LL> period) I get this message and have to delete the e-mail manually on the 
LL> server.

LL> Plus, all our admins receive a virus warning.

LL> Hence, I have been asked to remove The Bat.

LL> Just my experience - those problems may be obsolete by now.

Not so obsolete. I had the same problem when testing KAV personal Pro 5 with TB3 !

TB3 froze because KAV blocked some TB databases files. It was very annoying. That why 
I 've chosen AVG 7. Now viruses are great managed and moved to quarantine without 
perturbation.

And for firewall I use Kerio Personal Firewall 4. It's free and work well with my 
system (AVG / Ad-Aware 6 / TB3).

I feel well protected. :-) 

Maybe an illusion...

-- 
WilWilWil 
:flag-france:


TB 3.0.1.33
BayesIt! 0.7.3
Windows XP
Service Pack 1

Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: PC-cillin and TB!

[Leo Landa]

On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, P.Johnson wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
> protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
> Internet Security. I am wondering if any TB! users have tried this
> suite; and more generally, if there has to be specific compatibility
> between email programs and virus software.

I have a Trend Micro Office Suite mandatory at work, including the laptop 
which runs The Bat (1.x) for my private mail. I receive a lot of spam, and 
some of it is virus-infected. The problem is, that when the Bat stores 
this virus attachment on disk, the OfficeScan pops up saying it's a virus. 
For some reason TheBat cannot continue operation (I guess because 
OfficeScan takes over the file for quarantine or smth), and the message is 
not deleted on the server. This means that every 5 minutes (my polling 
period) I get this message and have to delete the e-mail manually on the 
server.

Plus, all our admins receive a virus warning.

Hence, I have been asked to remove The Bat.

Just my experience - those problems may be obsolete by now.

Leo.




Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

PC-cillin and TB!

[P.Johnson]

Hello,

I'm getting a new computer and want to get the best firewall and virus
protection I can, and have been looking at Trend Micro PC-cillin
Internet Security. I am wondering if any TB! users have tried this
suite; and more generally, if there has to be specific compatibility
between email programs and virus software.

On the Trend site, under System Requirements, email, The Bat! is not
listed. I asked whether PC-cillin would scan my TB! mail, and got this
reply:

"We have no answer to this question for now but you may try using your
software but please enable the webmail scan feature. If you experience
any problems, please do not hesitate to write us.
Hope this helps."

Hmmm.

Thank you!

-- 
Best wishes,
Pat

A Canadian in Houston
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1



Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html