Hello James Senick, On Tue, 19 Nov 2002 21:38:41 -0500 GMT your local time, which was Wednesday, November 20, 2002, 9:38:41 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
James Senick wrote: > Hello Daniel, > On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, at 22:52:11 [GMT +0100] (which was 4:52:11 > PM in NY, USA) Daniel Dekany wrote: >> I don't understand why people who uses on-access scanner (and you do, >> if I don't misunderstand you) want integrate Virus protection with >> TB!, but perhaps I miss something. > I can't answer for Chris but perhaps he and I share some of > these reasons... > 1. Just because an anti-virus application has on-access > capability does not necessarily mean that they use it as such; > one may be able to configure it for on demand only scanning such > as I do with Panda. IMO, on access scanning is a huge waste of > resources and stability. > 2. Many A/V applications disallow (or are administered to > disallow) any user intervention when dealing with suspicious > files. The majority of the A/V's in this class that I have seen > just clean or delete the suspect file without much warning. I'm > not comfortable with this. I like to verify that the file is > indeed infected before any action is taken. Even worse, many do it wrong... I see in many cases where Norton and outlook express are involved that the OPA virus (and similar ones) get stuck in quarantine but the Av doesnt prevent messing around with registry or win.ini. As a result systems produce messages that certain files are missing... -- Best regards, tracer Using theBAT 1.60q mail to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] C.C.S. Associates FAX (USA): (208) 460-3753 pgp 6.5.3 : 0x909D9B10 ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
