cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Beware of computer virus

Former Member
0 Kudos

I've found this article and think is very interesting for everyone

Computer experts like Damon at Geek Rescue know all about this latest virus.

“The storm virus is a Trojan horse virus that can get into your system."

He says it gets into your computer system by appearing as an attachment in your email.

If you click it you can unknowingly install that program and just that quick your computer becomes infected.

Experts say the "storm virus" is the largest computer virus attack in more than a year.

"Virus creators try to take over your machine and use it as part of what we call a bot network-large group of computers infected and then turns around and infects other computers or a large network like credit card companies or banks."

So how do you avoid the virus?

"You protect yourself by updating your anti-virus protection."

And in this case Damon says his best advice is to be careful about what attachment you open up in your email program.

Experts say emailers should be careful when it comes to all pop-up messages.

They say especially watch out for those with love related subject lines as well as messages with worm alert subject lines.

If you think your computer is under attack you can use the following antivirus:

- Norton, AVG, Avast, etc. (software).

- Infectedornot.com, bitdefender, etc. (free online scanning)

Good luck!!

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (2)

Answers (2)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Dear Anton:

I'm so sorry for the mistake. The article was published in April 15th on FOX23 News.

Laura

Former Member
0 Kudos

It seems we should rather be beware of FOX23 News

Former Member
0 Kudos

hehehe.

but it's cool to find an (outdated) IT news story between all the American Idol stuff and the latest gossips about Britney Spears.

)

marilyn_pratt
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

A coffee corner is the place for these kind of conversations so I'll respond to you, Laura. Welcome to our community. Unless you were selling anti-virus programs, or marketing some service, I wouldn't consider an honest attempt to be community minded spam. It might be considered naive, uninitiated, and beginner behavior, which I would hope, would be met with patience, tolerance and acceptance. Unfriendly, unwelcoming and rude behavior to newcomers isn't something I would like to condone.

Please don't take offense Laura. If you want to be "in" here you have to have a pretty thick skin. The learning curve is steep and the acceptance bar high.

Former Member
0 Kudos

<a href="http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=996513">http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=996513</a>

eddy_declercq
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Anton,

Excellent investigation.

If Laura is for real, I expect that the BC reveils a bit more than the she is from Burundi (didn't know that they have so English sounding names overe there).

Eddy

-


PS. Reward the useful answers and you will get <a href="http:///people/baris.buyuktanir2/blog/2007/04/04/point-for-points-reward-yourself">one point</a> yourself!

marilyn_pratt
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

You win and very clever of you too, Anton. This definately looks like spam. My apologies.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Marilyn,

Assuming it was not a spam, what do you propose for 'unfriendly, unwelcoming and rude' behavior that you see here?

You see I am taking offense here, of what I see as over-zealousness of moderators. It is alright to make efforts to be as welcoming to newcomers as one can, but I don't agree this is the way to go about it - where you see your role as of facilitating more members as the highest (or I should say the only) priority.

I assist as many people on SDN as I can and while I (and others) do engage in banters at times, of late the moderators' responses have become pretty ..errr.. silly should I say. That is , the moderators weighing in on every little perceived 'uncondonable' behavior, it is almost time I should start making my own black list (like you seem to have of people whose responses send the 'red' alerts triggering).

So you call someone rude, craig sends his cry of 'shame on you' to SDN faithfuls (see the other thread - his response to Eugene), and so on. I do see a pattern here where SDN moderator's threshold of tolerance is going down by each day. Which is not a bad thing, only that it is not directed where it should be - it seems to work with only one objective - more numbers joining SDN. If that is the case, let it be explicitly stated and understood by everyone.

SDN doesn't owe anyone anything, and you and other moderators can run the show as you please, but as a regular contributor I must say it is not going the way it should be.

Cheers,

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Marylin,

I have to say that SOMETIMES I also have a controversial feelings about the moderators responses (not to newbies). SOMETIMES I even had to classify some of them for myself as unfreindly and harsh (I'm not referring you in this thread). And it was not limited by 'shame on you'.

And I support Ajay in his claims.

Best regards,

Eugene

marilyn_pratt
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Ajay and Eugene,

I think I can see how you might translate our efforts of inclusiveness or concern for being welcoming as coming from purely a numbers game. We are very vocal in our pleasure with having a large, <b>vibrant</b> and <b>committed</b> community and obviously growing community is in the job description of evangelists. We are here to serve you and not the other way around. No mistakes there. I think though that you do realize that while this is a job for us, we also are passionate about what we do. Passion isn't a commercial or mechanical thing, obviously, and it can't be "bought" or salaried. We wouldn't be spending inordinate hours online, wouldn't care about responding, wouldn't be so emotional if we didn't care and care deeply...at the end of the day..about other human beings here.

So I ask you to consider another explanation for my own responses. And, of course, I can only speak for myself when I explain my own position on community advocacy in this way: as a minority here, in age and gender, I do concern myself with what I perceive to be "equal opportunity" issues.

What is missing for me in our present state of maintaining a productive environment and evolving new audiences is some kind of newbie indoctrination. That might be something, we as the collaboration team should do a better job of, whether it be tutorials, or helpful instructions sets or use of extended mentors and trusted advisors.

You have every right to be insulted when you perceive your own right as veterans to have fun is infringed upon and you know from the high level of interactivity that you enjoy with our team that your efforts and opinions are highly regarded. So perhaps it is the product of my age, or rather the privilege of it that has me focus too much energy on kindness, inclusiveness and civility as paramount behaviors. And perhaps your reminder to "lighten up" shakes me up enough to see that we (I mean me, here ) needs to be balanced in attitude, and not take this, you, myself so seriously.

So I think you can't deny that as a functionary here, I am fairly consistent and even fair in admitting mistakes or ignorance. And over time, what I have given up is a need to be right. So what shall I say? We can declare a bit of a moratorium on over-engineering involvement? Step back and take it a bit easier?

From my perspective, I'd like to dedicate my efforts to building ways for people to enjoy their participation, by removing what I consider access barriers. Perhaps that means taking a break from over involvement here. That would be refreshing. Especially if that means that the efforts also become barriers. More relaxed attitude on my part, less infringement on your turf.

But I'm still left questioning: is there really room here for "others"? Or is this to be an exclusive and excluding environment? I'll leave you all to ponder.

thanks,

Marilyn

Former Member
0 Kudos

wow!

since points are considered to be so important here I'd call this a 12k opposition.

i, for myself, don't feel to be rude, just refuse to put any single thought into diplomatic words and I don't think that one needs a unusual thick skin in this forum.

nevertheless i don't count myself into the opposition, imho 'the situation' is yet far from a need of escalation.

peace everyone,

anton

marilyn_pratt
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

That's forgiving Anton (if I read your response correctly). If I should have learned anything here, it is to know better than to argue with you. You are almost always right. Not beautifying truths is your signature theme.

Again my apologies for doubting your intent with this poster.

And good catch. I would have expected to see the full hand (reasons for scolding the spammer) up front. But you were already 10 steps ahead. I suppose, I'd rather candid straight than false diplomacy.

thanks and peace to you.

Former Member
0 Kudos

<i>But I'm still left questioning: is there really room here for "others"? Or is this to be an exclusive and excluding environment? I'll leave you all to ponder.</i>

This is what concerns me; after so much interaction and empirical data of our behavior on forums, one could think that 'we' (the perceived pro-exclusivity people) would be taken as someone equally interested in welcoming and helping new members and not sitting on the opposing end of the newbie welcome committee.

You are right though, it might be just that we need to lighten up a bit. I know I need to.

And finally, I don't doubt your and Craig's (and others') intention or passion, just wanted to share what I felt as a somewhat skewed situation.

Cheers,

eddy_declercq
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi,

A said in my Grumpy (/people/eddy.declercq/blog/2007/01/23/from-the-grumpier-old-man-any-way-the-wind-blows), I think that being a newcomer can't never be an excuse or safe-conduct for misbehaviors.

As far it concerns to me, taking over a text from another source without naming the source (as Anton rightfully proofed) is in contradiction to the SDN philosophy. And I didn't say anything about the content.

Furthermore, when one posts it under a name from an actress, who seems to live in Burundi (and further no info in the BC) proves to me that he/she isn't honest about their identity either.

Concluding, I don't see any extenuating circumstances. One might find it harsh, but I don't see - again said in that Grumpy - any reason to attack the bell-ringer(s) for pointing out that kind of behavior.

Eddy

marilyn_pratt
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

No argue with you there, Eddy. The moment that the Anton identified the "scam", I rescinded and apologized. He was absolutely correct as you were to say: 'that behavior doesn't belong here". But my concern will always be that we (myself included) are often hasty to draw conclusions that are based on some less reliable instincts: pre-conceived geographical bias, gender. You see, I jumped to the "lady's" defense. That was based on emotion, rather than fact.

When you alert us to misdoings, it is usually valuable to substantiate them with the facts. Anton's link did that nicely. Looking into discrepancies in the business card did that as well. Craig and I cannot be expected to "guess" motivations for whistleblowing even if the alerts come from our most active, respected and dedicated participants. Even internally we have these debates about "what to do with misbehavior". Sometimes the "investigation" is so time-consuming as to render any other positive activity we engage in impossible. So a simple request: when you have a concern, spell it out for this grandmother. I don't do subtle all that well.

Thanks

Former Member
0 Kudos

Please stop spamming this place!

This virus is not recent but more than 3 months old and thus recognized by every moderately carefully maintained system since the anti-virus programs know it since then.

Additionally this is no more dangerous than any other Trojan around.

Info: <a href="http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2007-011917-1403-99&tabid=1">Symantec</a>

anton