More stuff gone! - OS2

This is a discussion on More stuff gone! - OS2 ; In article , "Mentore Siesto" wrote: > >It's such a simple question I can't understand why this is causing >these flames. > >Btw, could you reply in a not-Outlook way? Thanks in advance :-) First you try to extinguish a ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 45

Thread: More stuff gone!

  1. Re: More stuff gone!

    In article ,
    "Mentore Siesto" wrote:
    >
    >It's such a simple question I can't understand why this is causing
    >these flames.
    >
    >Btw, could you reply in a not-Outlook way? Thanks in advance :-)


    First you try to extinguish a flame war, then you try to start another flame
    war over top posting? You're a naughty boy. :-)

    I asked the same question a while ago (why use antivirus?) and started a
    similar... discussion.
    I came away from it with a solution that fits my own purposes:

    I don't use AV on my OS/2 machines, the risk to them is too low to make it
    worth the time and effort.
    I rarely transfer files to a Windows machine from an OS/2 machine. When I
    do, I scan them on the Windows machine.

    My reasoning is that the Windows machine has more up to date and
    comprehensive anti-virus and anti-spyware software than is available for
    OS/2, so it makes sense to do all my checking there. For example, I often
    use my work laptop plugged into my home network. All files from untrusted
    external sources (CDROMs, USB memory drives, all network except the work VPN
    etc) are automatically scanned on access. Pre-scanning on the OS/2 machine
    will not make the process significantly safer.

    --
    Don Hills (dmhills at attglobaldotnet) Wellington, New Zealand
    "New interface closely resembles Presentation Manager,
    preparing you for the wonders of OS/2!"
    -- Advertisement on the box for Microsoft Windows 2.11 for 286

  2. Re: More stuff gone!

    In , on 10/04/2008
    at 06:49 AM, "Mentore Siesto" said:



    >On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 02:09:59 UTC, TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:


    >> There is no OS/2 virus anywhere. Windows virus do not do anything to
    >> OS/2. Why do you keep believing there is something to worry about?


    >The question is, is there some (theoretical) possibility that some
    >Windows / Mac / Linux virus might damage some OS/2 components?
    >Especially now that we rely so much on components like LIBC/kLIBC,
    >Mozilla and Odin/Innotek Runtime?


    This is nonsense. I have actually tried to infect OS/2 and/or damage it
    by opening files -- nothing happened. Zero. No effect, with Odin and the
    rest of the components installed.


    >Some say yes, some say not. It's user's freedom and responsability to
    >choose if to use an antivirus program (and OS/2 has got at least two of
    >them native) or not, and take some risk.


    There is no risk. But hey people do have the right to live in an
    alternate universe.


    >It's such a simple question I can't understand why this is causing these
    >flames.


    >Btw, could you reply in a not-Outlook way? Thanks in advance :-)


    Its time to get on board with standards used in the rest of the world.




    >Mentore



  3. Re: More stuff gone!

    In , on 10/05/2008
    at 03:28 AM, black.hole.4.spam@gmail.com (Don Hills) said:



    >In article ,
    >TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:
    >>
    >>Its time to get on board with standards used in the rest of the world.


    >Does that mean we should also give up on OS/2 and use Windows, OS X or
    >Linux?



    Stop taking things out of context to whine. Franky I don't care what
    pleases or doesn't please you. I cite as I choose. Like it or lump it.









    >For Usenet, the standard has always been guote first, then respond. If
    >you think this is non-standard, take a look at web-based forums, where
    >most of the users have never seen or used Usenet. They usually post
    >"quote above, response below" because it is the natural thing to do.


    >Quoting Microsoft Outlook style is an exception, not the rule.





  4. Re: More stuff gone!

    In article ,
    TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:
    >
    >Its time to get on board with standards used in the rest of the world.


    Does that mean we should also give up on OS/2 and use Windows, OS X or
    Linux?

    For Usenet, the standard has always been guote first, then respond. If you
    think this is non-standard, take a look at web-based forums, where most of
    the users have never seen or used Usenet. They usually post "quote above,
    response below" because it is the natural thing to do.

    Quoting Microsoft Outlook style is an exception, not the rule.

    --
    Don Hills (dmhills at attglobaldotnet) Wellington, New Zealand
    A: Because it is contrary to the logical flow of the message.
    Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
    A: Top-posting, aka "Reply on top, full quotes below."
    Q: What is the most annoying thing you can do on Usenet?

  5. More stuff gone!

    + User FidoNet address: 1:396/45
    * Original message posted in: OS2.
    * Crossposted in: COMP-OS2-MISC.
    Hello All.

    Here's a disturbing e-mail from Norman Data Defense (Norman VC
    for OS/2):

    -o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-CUT-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-
    From: Marc Lewis
    To: norman@norman.com
    Cc: Support@norman.com
    Date: 09/25/2008 07:47 PM
    Subject: Query about my license renewal.
    =-=-=BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=-=-=
    Hash: SHA1
    Hello,

    I have just renewed my Norman Virus Control for OS/2 license via
    your Digital River link. I now note that you apparently no
    longer support the OS/2 product on your web site. Does that
    imply that there will no longer be virus definition updates
    available for my OS/2 version of your product?

    (If you have in fact stopped update support for the OS/2 version
    of Norman V.C. I would have to request a refund of the renewal
    fee I have just submitted... But hopefully that won't be the
    case!) Please advise.

    Sincere thanks.
    -
    *****************************************
    * Best regards,
    * Marc.
    [SNIP]

    To : marc.lewis@=-=-=-=-=-.com
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    Subject: Re: Fw: Query about my license renewal.
    X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.0.1 February 07, 2008
    From: Jermaine.Lowery@norman.com
    Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:10:28 -0400

    Hi,

    OS/2 downloads and support for OS/2 have been discontinued.
    Your refund is being processed. We apologize for any
    inconvenience this may have caused. Thank you.

    Best Regards,

    Jermaine Lowery
    Channel Account Representative
    Norman Data Defense Systems, Inc.
    -o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-CUT-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

    Odd that ECS current release (2.0RC5) ships _with_ Norman VC as
    an installable option.

    Anyone have any further info for alternate virus control for
    OS/2 systems?

    Best regards,
    Marc
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++
    + The FidoNet News Gate (Meridian, MS - USA) +
    + The views of this user are strictly his or her own. +
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++

  6. Re: More stuff gone!

    On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 14:55:58 UTC in comp.os.os2.misc, "Doug Bissett"
    wrote:

    > those of us
    > who do have the knowledge, and the tools, need to do all that we can
    > to stop, or, at least reduce, the problem.


    You have not a clue what you are talking about.

    --
    Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK
    Trevor dot Hemsley at ntlworld dot com

  7. Re: More stuff gone!

    On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:58:21 GMT, TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:
    >(Don Hills) said:
    >>TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:
    >>>
    >>>Its time to get on board with standards used in the rest of the world.

    >
    >>Does that mean we should also give up on OS/2 and use Windows, OS X or
    >>Linux?

    >
    > Stop taking things out of context to whine. Franky I don't care what
    > pleases or doesn't please you. I cite as I choose.
    > Like it or lump it.


    Or, *plonk* it -- as I now chose to do.


  8. Re: More stuff gone!

    In article ,
    black.hole.4.spam@gmail.com says...

    > Quoting Microsoft Outlook style is an exception, not the rule.


    It's just the inherent laziness of most computer users these days. Do
    you expect an answer before you ask a question? Most top-posters I
    write off as people who obviously don't know anything worthwhile since
    they can't even bother to take the time to reply to a post of any type
    logically. Since they can't use logic, they obviously don't know much
    of anything that would be worth anything to someone who knows how to
    reply the correct way.

    On top of that, the inherent inability of some people in here to delete
    quotes in messages that have nothing to do with the subject shows a lack
    of intelligence too.

    Those who don't bother to use their real names or a real email address
    generally don't deserve responding to either.

    Just my thoughts.

    Later,
    Sean

    --
    Sean Dennis * sean@nsbbs.info * http://nsbbs.info

  9. Re: More stuff gone!

    TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:
    > There is no OS/2 virus anywhere. Windows virus do not do anything to
    > OS/2. Why do you keep believing there is something to worry about?
    >


    Some of us (including myself) are running mail servers and mailing lists
    used by users of other OS. We need the ability of protecting them from
    getting infected anyway.

    BTW Nonman AV has been lately the cause of severe system unstsbility,
    and I already switched to Clamav (blessing to Yuri Dario!) months ago.

    piersante

  10. Re: More stuff gone!

    On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 11:32:20 UTC, black.hole.4.spam@gmail.com (Don
    Hills) wrote:

    > In article ,
    > "Mentore Siesto" wrote:
    > >
    > >It's such a simple question I can't understand why this is causing
    > >these flames.
    > >
    > >Btw, could you reply in a not-Outlook way? Thanks in advance :-)

    >
    > First you try to extinguish a flame war, then you try to start another flame
    > war over top posting? You're a naughty boy. :-)


    I was born to be a Bad Boy (TM) :-)

    > I asked the same question a while ago (why use antivirus?) and started a
    > similar... discussion.
    > I came away from it with a solution that fits my own purposes:
    >
    > I don't use AV on my OS/2 machines, the risk to them is too low to make it
    > worth the time and effort.
    > I rarely transfer files to a Windows machine from an OS/2 machine. When I
    > do, I scan them on the Windows machine.
    >
    > My reasoning is that the Windows machine has more up to date and
    > comprehensive anti-virus and anti-spyware software than is available for
    > OS/2, so it makes sense to do all my checking there. For example, I often
    > use my work laptop plugged into my home network. All files from untrusted
    > external sources (CDROMs, USB memory drives, all network except the work VPN
    > etc) are automatically scanned on access. Pre-scanning on the OS/2 machine
    > will not make the process significantly safer.


    Viruses are imho everybody's problem. I tend not to use antivirus
    software on my OS/2 machines, because a) I use only standard sources,
    b) try to download only useful (for me) things (mainly development
    tools), c) do use Windows only at work and d) NEVER connect my only
    Windows machine to the 'net.

    Said that, I'm thinking about using ClamAV on eCS, because interaction
    between my machines is increasing, and I frequently transfer some work
    to and from a Windows machine I use at work. It's so ugly, btw.

    It's just a choice, I don't see why someone should argue or fight with
    anyone around.

    Mentore

  11. Re: More stuff gone!

    On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 12:37:34 UTC, TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:

    > In , on 10/04/2008
    > at 06:49 AM, "Mentore Siesto" said:
    >
    >
    >
    > >On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 02:09:59 UTC, TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:

    >
    > >> There is no OS/2 virus anywhere. Windows virus do not do anything to
    > >> OS/2. Why do you keep believing there is something to worry about?

    >
    > >The question is, is there some (theoretical) possibility that some
    > >Windows / Mac / Linux virus might damage some OS/2 components?
    > >Especially now that we rely so much on components like LIBC/kLIBC,
    > >Mozilla and Odin/Innotek Runtime?

    >
    > This is nonsense. I have actually tried to infect OS/2 and/or damage it
    > by opening files -- nothing happened. Zero. No effect, with Odin and the
    > rest of the components installed.


    And I see that this is good, really good. But alas, there's not only
    this. Mozilla and other software (I'm thinking of OpenOffice) is using
    various middleware and specific API, which are subjected to exploits.
    You surely read many reports about upgrading Thunderbird / Firefox /
    Seamonkey releases, due to vulnerabilities.... Some of them have been
    reported NOT to work on OS/2 (and this is just another Good Thing),
    but we have always been told to upgrade "Just in case".

    > >Some say yes, some say not. It's user's freedom and responsability to
    > >choose if to use an antivirus program (and OS/2 has got at least two of
    > >them native) or not, and take some risk.

    >
    > There is no risk. But hey people do have the right to live in an
    > alternate universe.


    There is no risk until you find a risk. You see, the OS/2 structure is
    *really* robust, even more than we think about. This is due to the
    hard work done from 2.11 to Warp 3 and 4, and I'm so happy this is so
    robust we can even run OS/2 on modern machines. But: is it really
    invulnerable? No. This is true at least with respect to TCP/IP and
    NetBIOS.

    > >It's such a simple question I can't understand why this is causing these
    > >flames.

    >
    > >Btw, could you reply in a not-Outlook way? Thanks in advance :-)

    >
    > Its time to get on board with standards used in the rest of the world.


    I hate to see answers before questions...

    Mentore

  12. Re: More stuff gone!

    On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 18:14:21 UTC, "Trevor Hemsley"
    wrote:

    > On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 14:55:58 UTC in comp.os.os2.misc, "Doug Bissett"
    > wrote:
    >
    > > those of us
    > > who do have the knowledge, and the tools, need to do all that we can
    > > to stop, or, at least reduce, the problem.

    >
    > You have not a clue what you are talking about.


    I do know what I am talking about. True, stopping just one virus, at a
    local level, doesn't help much, but every one that gets stopped is one
    less that will spread further, and that could help many people
    downstream, whether you believe it, or not.

    --
    From the eComStation 2.0 RC2 of Doug Bissett
    dougb007 at telus dot net
    (Please make the obvious changes, to e-mail me)


  13. Re: More stuff gone!

    In , on 10/04/2008
    at 02:55 PM, "Doug Bissett" said:

    >Viruses are EVERYBODIES problem, whether the specific OS is, or can be,
    >affected, or not. The only hope, that we have, to eliminate (or reduce
    >to a minimum) the virus problem, is for EVERYBODY to use virus
    >detection, and remove anything that is infected, before it has a chance
    >to spread.


    Nonsense; virus and worm infestations depend on security flaws in the OS
    and applications; an application or OS without the security flaws is not
    vulnerable. An application or OS with security flaws will be vulnerable
    to new attack vectors even if you run a virus scan. The only way to get
    rid of the problem is to get rid of the vulnerabilities. That includes
    getting rid of protocols that depend on executing externally supplied code
    outside of a sandbox.

    --
    Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

    Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
    right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
    domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
    reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org


  14. Re: More stuff gone!

    In , on 10/04/2008
    at 12:37 PM, TruthTeller@nospam.net said:

    >Its time to get on board with standards used in the rest of the world.


    K3wl. Now if only you know what "there rest of the world" is doing. There
    is no standard specifying top posting, and quite a bit of material saying
    to not do it. Have you ever been asked to review a document? Try putting
    all of your comments at the top, followed by a quote of the entire
    document, and see what kind of response you get.

    Post top don't please.

    --
    Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

    Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
    right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
    domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
    reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org


  15. Re: More stuff gone!

    Hmmmmm..

    Steven Levine wrote:

    >
    > NAV updates are still available. The .lin files supplied for Linux are
    > just renamed .zip files. The .lin files don't have OS/2 specific engine
    > updates, but you've been running NAV without any of these for many years.
    > I guess you've been lucky that your windows boxes have not been attacked
    > by any of the threats are are invisible to the NAV virus engine.


    I wonder. Do these same .ZIP files exist on the WIN-XP version of whatever? I
    have two mobile drive trays here for pure research purposes only. One of them
    has NVC on it and is current as to updates and will remain that way as to paid
    for in-advance service for a good while yet. Do you happen to know if the .ZIP
    files are the same there?

    Currently, as best I know, the following files are important to the update of
    the NVC product:

    > 1-08-08 1:06p 526411 0 NSE_OS2.DLL
    > 6-24-08 9:43a 20676534 0 NVCBIN.DEF
    > 4-01-08 1:29a 28112 0 Nvcincr.def
    > 3-31-08 2:33p 401976 0 NVCMACRO.DEF


    Obviously, the NSE_OS2.DLL isn't going to be a change item. As well, the issue
    with the whole collapse of this issue, as far as I know, was focused on an
    update of the NVCMACRO.DEF file dated on 3-31-08, together with the Nvcincr.def
    file dated 4-01-08 above. Here, when they released an update of those files,
    the whole operation blew up for all instances of any incremental updates. They
    were able to restore system operations only by focusing on a complete download
    of the large NVCBIN.DEF file, which would and will work with the older smaller
    files here.

    I was able to restore serviceability for the whole system with the above
    components through the final release date for serviced code.

    Can you teach us what a corresponding 'set' of files and dates might be to
    enable at least some on-going use of the product? Of course, with no guarantee
    by Norman that this would work.

    Curious mind wants to know.

    --


    --> Sleep well; OS2's still awake!

    Mike Luther

  16. Re: More stuff gone!


    In <48e7fe23$2$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>, on 10/04/2008
    at 07:37 PM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
    said:



    >In , on 10/04/2008
    > at 12:37 PM, TruthTeller@nospam.net said:


    >>Its time to get on board with standards used in the rest of the world.


    >K3wl. Now if only you know what "there rest of the world" is doing.



    Really? People in business and government top post all the time. Have
    been for years. End of discussion.



    There
    >is no standard specifying top posting, and quite a bit of material saying
    >to not do it. Have you ever been asked to review a document? Try putting
    >all of your comments at the top, followed by a quote of the entire
    >document, and see what kind of response you get.


    >Post top don't please.





  17. Re: More stuff gone!

    In <48e96d82$0$5493$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net>, on 10/06/2008
    at 01:44 AM, Mike Luther said:

    Hi,

    >I wonder. Do these same .ZIP files exist on the WIN-XP version of
    >whatever?


    I don't know, although I suspect the answer is no. I imagine MS would
    require vendors to use something MSI compatible.

    The link to the zip file you need to update NAV is

    ftp://ftp.symantec.com/public/englis...ease/ennlu.lin

    The REXX script that grabs and installs the updates uses an unzip command
    of the form

    'unzip -jo' ZipName '-d' unzipDir' -x *.so'

    since eCS/OS2 does not need the .so files. unzipDir points to the NAV
    Incoming directory.

    >Do you happen to know if the .ZIP files are the same there?


    Nope. I have never used NVC.


    Steven

    --
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Steven Levine MR2/ICE 3.00.11.17 BETA #10183
    eCS/Warp/DIY/14.103a_W4 www.scoug.com irc.ca.webbnet.info #scoug (Wed 7pm PST)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  18. Re: More stuff gone!

    In , on 09/29/2008
    at 11:26 PM, "Doug Bissett" said:

    >To assume that an eCS, or OS/2, user doesn't need some sort of virus
    >protection, is very dangerous. True, there are no known viruses that
    >affect eCS, unless you run ODIN, or use the innotek runtime, or use
    >WinOS2, or use e-mail,


    Please name a virus that can infect my system when I use e-mail.

    >A virus is unlikely to do what it was designed to do, but that doesn't
    >mean that it can't cause trouble.


    Someone has to execute it before it can cause trouble. That typically
    means a client that automatically launches susceptible applications.

    --
    Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

    Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
    right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
    domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
    reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org


  19. Re: More stuff gone!

    Oooops!

    Steven Levine wrote:

    > I don't know, although I suspect the answer is no. I imagine MS would
    > require vendors to use something MSI compatible.
    >
    > The link to the zip file you need to update NAV is
    >
    > ftp://ftp.symantec.com/public/englis...ease/ennlu.lin


    > Nope. I have never used NVC.


    My error! Norman is not Norton. Sorry, I've been a bad puppy here on this one.

    --


    --> Sleep well; OS2's still awake!

    Mike Luther

  20. Re: More stuff gone!

    In , on 10/06/2008
    at 09:40 AM, TruthTeller@nospam.net said:

    >Really? People in business and government top post all the time.


    ROTF,LMAO. You wrote "the rest of the world", and that includes a lot more
    than the people in business and government. For that matter, not all of
    the people in business and government top post.

    >Have been for years.


    Some have, some haven't.

    >End of discussion.


    Only if the topic is whether you are confused about the difference between
    existential and universal quantifiers.

    --
    Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

    Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
    right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
    domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
    reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast