Comodo acquires BOClean in Security http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18075683 en Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:31:40 EDT Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:31:40 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18151138 Kiwi : Trojans & virus activity seems relevant to a preponderance of stupidity, in surfing habits.

The larger picture are those programs that have a propensity to ASPI hook into your personal realm; meaning those that have no moral issue in accessing your pass worded material. Evident when one installs a program & utilizes that programs email log in~ sign in. -Is it only me that finds it strange that in such a circumstance, when prompted for a sign in....I notice secure log in features [Like a user_name] that's not ever been part of the picture for THAT program or log in, but is for another AND secure site?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18151138 Tue, 10 Apr 2007 23:35:58 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18146931 anon : "From a financial point of view, the other way around would be far more likely."

We'll see. ;) Muahahahahaha. :D :D :D ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18146931 Tue, 10 Apr 2007 10:20:45 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18143924 anon :
quote:
Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next so I can get free copy of that too?


From a financial point of view, the other way around would be far more likely. So keep on dreaming :) ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18143924 Mon, 09 Apr 2007 19:46:10 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18143063 Buddel : Eset has always made sure that NOD32

(1) is light on resources
(2) is compatible even with older operating systems
(3) runs very smoothly on most machines
(4) detects almost all sorts of malware.

If NOD32 belonged to Comodo, I'm not too sure whether this AV would still be as good as it has always been. And yes, the four points I mentioned above also apply to BOClean. What's more, BOClean support has always been fantastic. Will we also get this top-notch support now that BOClean belongs to Comodo? I have my doubts...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18143063 Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:22:07 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18142967 dadkins :
said by Buddel See Profile :

said by morgan edge :

Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next ...
I do hope this will never happen.
Why is that Buddel?
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18142967 Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:05:15 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18142824 Buddel :
said by morgan edge :

Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next ...
I do hope this will never happen.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18142824 Mon, 09 Apr 2007 16:41:48 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18142749 Be1ge : No not yet but Kevin is working on it.
There is now a Comodo BOClean forum over at the Comodo website where Kevin posts daily.
He mentioned something about "getting it out" or "getting it out right" then said when BOClean is ready everyone will know.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18142749 Mon, 09 Apr 2007 16:31:33 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18142624 anon : So is the free Comodo BOClean out yet?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18142624 Mon, 09 Apr 2007 16:08:29 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18114175 anon : Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next so I can get free copy of that too? Now that would be kewl. :D ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18114175 Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:24:25 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18114110 Psicop : Kevin,

Thanks for being straight forward otherwise you wouldn't post either in here or at Wilders in the first place.

Yes the key question is the one you stated right at the beginning of your post:

YOU CANNOT POSSIBLY COMPETE AGAINST A FREEBIE.

Look at the magic 3 for example: Avast-AVG-Antivir.

What's the point of paying $60 bucks a year when you have basically the same product in free form.

Let me tell you the only investment I made in this machine is my "near-industrial-strength router", and let me assure you nothing gets past it even when I surfed well into the dark side for testing purposes. But the router is only one more layer, there are others as well which are in essence: Limited account, tightened OS and "neural-gymnastics." ;)

You did what you had to do, and that is called: feed your stomach first. I still can't believe the fact of some consumers whining for your decision. I guess they need to invest not in a product but in a process itself, and IMO BoClean is not the answer.

Good luck in your new venture.

Regards.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18114110 Wed, 04 Apr 2007 03:00:17 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18113947 rotty97 : Kevin, why is the aim to go deeper into the Kernel?? Windows Vista has locked the Kernel will your new technique work with Vista?

Personally i think going into the kernel at all is not a future-proof solution and is about as effective in the long term as using signature based scanning ONLY (Signature scanning is usually less damaging to the users computer than kernel mode anti-stuff).

Without asking too much info, your new technique sounds like you are almost just loading the OS into a VM session???

Would your technique resist being loaded into a VM session??]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18113947 Wed, 04 Apr 2007 01:30:17 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18113869 anon : I've never heard of BOClean till now but i definitely know, from what I've been reading, is that it has done a damn good job and will continue to do a damn good job. BOClean is not the miracle software that will protect you from ALL the internet roaches but has and will continue to do what it's first intention was to do from the beginning, it may change it's way of handling things but the same goal is still there. Is there really a one-software-fix-all? I don't think there is. BOClean may not be ritcher35, dadkins, or even my cup of tea, but to each his own. What it boils down to is that BOClean has helped many ppl, from it's history i don't doubt that it has helped thousands of ppl, and will continue to help ppl regardless. In conclusion, even though I've never used BOClean, probably because I've never heard of it before cus' i do like to tweak :D, I give BOClean props and respect for the commitment and dedication to accomplish and maintain it's goals. Two thumbs up! ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18113869 Wed, 04 Apr 2007 00:58:21 EDT Long boring one... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18112936 richter35 : *Somehow I know this is going to end up being taken harshly, but here it goes*

Thanks Kevin for replying in this thread. I for one used to visit Wilders daily a couple of years ago, but certain things took me off it. It's excellent resource on various software, tips, news and all, but BBR seems more balanced when it comes to discussions, to me.

Anyway, as others have said, you have to forgive us for being skeptical about Comodo. While they might not be a startup, they're rather new in this area (firewall/antivirus). It's better to be somewhat reserved than being blind follower. While they might have good intentions, they're first and foremost a company, and a company is driven by profits rather than altruistic deeds.

I don't agree with comments on saying that you sold out or that this is about money. In the end it is. You did not have enough resources aka funds to let BOClean thrive in direction you wanted it. This is not a bad thing. You're a person who works, has to pay his bills and needs to have some fun. It's better that you made sure it lives on rather than following the footsteps of other companies in AT business. I was astonished how unprofessionally DiamondCS handled their situation and the way they pulled out. While I won't comment on this and do not wish to start discussion related to it, I have huge respect for you as person looking how this situation is being handled.

Regarding BOClean itself. You probably feel like Galileo Galilei trying to explain the crowd that the Earth is not in the center of the universe. I somehow get your point and the way you try to tell us that what we believe how things should be done is passé. However, I know that you take different approach from the others. You diversified your software in a way that it doesn’t scan everything it moves, but rather that it should jump in when it’s really necessary, keeping resource load on minimum and nourishing the approach “don’t get infected in the first place”. All that is excellent and totally understandable.

The thing is that we’re not on same frequency. The reason why 99.99% of people will think different from you is that 99.99% of software do things that way. You are marketing BOClean as software which is used in conjunction with customer’s regular AV, and acts only when your AVs resident scanner does not detect malware. That sounds perfect. Then comes ignoramus like me and asks himself – If I already have good AV scanner with good detection rate, why do I need to run separate software to cover its back? Are “wasted” resources justifiable if I already well protected (patched system, firewall, AV, reading info on latest threats…)? How good this software really is (detection rate) vs other software of same kind? And number of other questions. Do note, I’m not asking these questions…I’m just saying that I ask myself this when I decide if I would want to use it. The truth is, computers get infected. Computers need to get disinfected. Tools of that kind are high on demand. While BOClean might be excellent software, it might not appeal to everyone no matter how much everyone would like it. Set as forget approach is excellent, but can you guarantee that unlike AVs, BOClean will catch everything (of course you can’t but that’s the general feeling when discussing this little gem)? It is signature based like the rest of the crowd, therefore is dependant on how quickly can it get updated to detect new nasties. I have no idea about technology/engines and all that. I’m not competent to talk about that (and probably about anything in this matter anyway). The truth is that BOClean might be great at what it does, and from user feedback it is, I find the range it covers a bit narrow. Don’t bite my head off for stating this without any evidence. As trivial and faulty it might be, I've never see any comparison which was not possible due to nature of this software. I can't wait until someone compares it against others once it is available for everyone. The main “issue” with BOClean is that, while it’s light and it’s great to protect system, it’s coverage is not wide enough to have it running solely by itself thus taking advantage of your approach on detaching nasties when they pose real threat. You still need other software to cover spyware/viruses - as BOClean is primarily an AT, I am not stating it does not detect other type of malware, just generalizing situation here a bit. Ten years ago it might have been bar none, but most AV these days are being multifunctional and do detect all kind of malware rather than just viruses like they used to thus running additional AT scanner makes little sense. Since “both” are signatures based, it’s just a matter of time who gets it first.

I may be totally wrong and I know most will disagree which is irrelevant as we’re having discussion. Even if we do step away a bit from some of us arguing whether or not we want AV/AT scanner to detect malware before it gets on your system, having it scanned constantly or just when it gets executed. The question being is BOClean all that better and superior in pure detection and malware coverage than what others are already offering? So far I have seen nothing but hearsay. And I am not trying to offend anyone here. BOClean has excellent reputation, which is something you have to earn and can loose easily. However, being focused on certain type of malware makes it less appealing for average Joe than some solution which offers better all around protection. Now, I know I’ll get replies to use multi-layered approach, and how BOClean is just addition to your AV scanner… The spectrum of BOClean (to my knowledge, and again I’m not competent to discuss its detection abilities) is rather narrow, AVs aren’t what they used to be and you no longer have to pull AV companies by their shirt to convince them that Trojans and spyware pose much greater threat than virus. They have resources, they are catching up and are getting better at it. So how can BOClean compare to competition? Is it unfair to compare others? How can you compare the two as anyone can argue that it’s not meant to be first line defense at all. I will argue if I really need second line defense as AVs are getting better and better in field that was once exclusive to BOClean/TrojanHunter and the gang. Once pure (correct me if I’m wrong) Trojan scanners (Ewido) evolving in all around mastodon which is capable to do a lot against tougher threats like spyware and trojans. Regular users don’t know about multilayer defense. They probably never heard of BOclean, they are less likely to use multiple solution that “do the same thing”.

To somehow sum up as I’m going way too broad than I wanted to be in the first place. Regardless of the way software functions – on-access ‘80s style or 23rd century memory/kernel only style (totally up to user user – some people here use “stone age” type of application and who am I to say it is worse than brand new vista style with shiny icons program of same/similar purpose), I just don’t see the advantage of BOClean to what others already offer. The way things progress nowadays the situation in which only BOClean will have definition for something good AV won’t, and taking into consideration most people don’t get infected with uber new just coded 5 minutes ago malware is rather unlikely makes BOClean… somewhat redundant, IMO. I know I’ll get 100 replies on success stories where BOClean saved their back for this sentence alone, but then again…I have no proof those are really true. BOClean did come as a champ in catching some nasties over past few years that I’ve read and seen videos of, but the glory did not last long before every major vendor caught up. Now…those things happen, but rare. We can spend 100 years talking what will happen if…but generally speaking, is it really needed to run something all the time when it will jump in once in 5 years. Most here will say yes, but I personally don’t. And even if something gets passed through, I will have a shot at fixing with something that does detect it – the 80s style – with on-demand scanner. You can argue that it’s redundant, it’s not needed…but truth is, it does come in handy when you do need it and not all of us deal with malware as their hobby and like to keep everything off – active or not. It’s just like with a supercar. Why do you need a car that can go 400km/h when you can’t achieve top speed on “any” road/highway and regular car will get you anywhere as well and can achieve its potential with ease. While my analogy could be/is flawed, the point is that you have a choice. It has nothing to do with paranoia, some people like apples while others like oranges. Why should I believe one way is the only way/the best to go? I personally won’t.

*Sorry to put you all to sleep with non-eloquent, poorly written, even worse elaborated post with utterly long sentences which you will have to blame my mother tongue for *

‘Night all. Kevin all the best with Comodo and keep it up despite Judas like me.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18112936 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 21:43:34 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18112021 dadkins :
said by K McAleavey See Profile :



No offense intended here, but it's always been amazing how low the bar has been for so-called "security experts" in forums.


Yep! Sure is! ;)

Good thing I have *NEVER* even eluded to be an expert on security! ;)

I try software.
I put it up against REAL malware.
If something is great, I will say "It's Great!".
If something sucks, I will say "It Sucks!".
There is a certain product/company I like.
They let me trial a new product.
Well, it sucked!
I TOLD them it sucked! Because, it *DID* suck!

I have never had a chance to try your BOC until recently.
No punches pulled here Kevin, so far... :huh:
The only thing it has seen that my AV didn't, was Gibson's Leak Test - a firewall test.

I have other software here that. IMO, is better than your product! Sorry.

I will continue to test thrash on that poor machine and see if BOC ever proves itself.

You still haven't addressed my question - doesn't BOC receive signature updates?
Wouldn't that put BOC also into the "signature-based mentality" that you dislike?

Whatever friend!
I hope you and COMODO do work out, and you get to improve THEIR software!

Have a great evening Kevin!
David

EDIT: In response to the NetBus querry...
No, I couldn't run it!
BOC wouldn't let me run it. What does that tell you?
Problem is though, I had to kill my AV before I could even download it!
Once downloaded, if I re-enabled the AV... detected and deleted.
Ok, leave AV off... extract the NetBus exe... BOC didn't flinch.
Clicked the NetBus exe... BOC stopped it.

So... it seems that I have a new monitor progran that detects an old ass exe... if,for whatever reason, my AV is ever turned off(HINT: AV is never turned off except to test... a new program)... I'm covered?
I can have that with other residents.

You see, the NetBus excuse it tired.
It is better IMO to never let that kind of crap on the machine instead of relying(I don't rely or trust anything) on something to catch it when/if it runs.

With AV off and BOC on, I can download god knows what.
With AV on, I can't even download these items.

So tell me/us again, what sets BOC apart from... other resident AT/AS/AM/A? programs...

--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18112021 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 18:49:54 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111936 K McAleavey : Yeah, seen yer comments and not to worry ... know where you're coming from. And NO, it isn't impressing ME either lately because the last time there's been any major code improvements in it was over a year ago now. Why? I had to choose. Cover the ZLOBS and other "real world" nasties actually infecting people's machines and deal with them *OR* do what I *knew* needed to be done for our code and *NOT* do those. Rock, hard place. And 4.23 will be only the slightest improvement in fixing the "low hanging fruit" so we can get it out the door quickly.

What I'd suggest is to let the dust settle, it's certainly better than any of our "competitors" are even as it lays. And once I don't have to be stuck in a lab for 30 hour shifts (32 tonight) any longer once my teams replace me with doing the malware, I'll FINALLY have time to do the coding again and get us back where we should be. All a matter of priorities and situations that were beyond my control. Until LAST WEEK.

Yeah, BOClean ain't what it used to be as far as leading edge goes ... that's why we HAD to do what we did or just pull the plug. Give it a shot and enjoy your freebie (or not) ... as I said enough already, "anti-anything" is *SO* 1980's. Same for your favorite AV. There's better answers and they're ALREADY getting coded, that's why I'm still awake. And those will be out sooner rather than later.

But in all fairness, I've read what your expectations are and you STILL don't understand the purpose or the design. And as far as that netbus silliness you posted a couple of days ago - you put up a windows folder with netbus.exe icon in it. You *ARE* aware owing to your critical expertise in all of this that NETBUS.EXE is the "client and builder" and NOT the actual trojan itself? You DID run NETBUS.EXE and "create server" and then run it to actually test BOClean?

You DID, right? :)

No offense intended here, but it's always been amazing how low the bar has been for so-called "security experts" in forums.
--
Kevin McAleavey submissions@nsclean.com
»www.nsclean.com


Makers of BOClean]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111936 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 18:33:37 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111768 dadkins : No offense Kevin, but doesn't BOC get Signature updates too?

I wish you nothing but the best... but some of the things you and your fellow BOC users post is humorous.

I have a running copy of BOC(don't ask) and I am sorry to say, I'm not impressed.
It does not live up to all the posts that I have read over the years.

I currently cannot say whether or not it is a necessary product.
First impressions though, now that I CAN try it, not too great - *SO FAR*.

We shall see...

Thanks to _________________ for giving me a chance to finally TRIAL BOClean. :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111768 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:52:00 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111708 mers2 :
said by K McAleavey See Profile :

Whoops! Sticky fingers after too many hours once again ... you're correct ... I'm STILL trying to figure out how to pronounce his LAST name but am too embarassed to ask. :)

But the misspelling does help me to pronounce it properly to his face and I *really* like the guy and don't want to get that wrong too. Me needs sleep but dropped by and couldn't believe that all the naysaying was still going on in earnest. :(
As I said, every company needs to earn the respect. Comodo is relatively new and their AV has been quite buggy, though the firewall is getting there. Can't wait to see what v. 3 is. Nothing has been known about Melhi's integrity. The response was only natural. With you aboard, and as Comodo improves and becomes more well known I have no doubt that will happen.
--
Team Discovery
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111708 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:39:55 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111685 mers2 : You have MUCH more integrity than some of your former competitors - for which we are all extremely grateful. :)

And yes, the "nasties" are getting more evil than most imagined possible so I'm happy you'll have the time and money to fight the good fight. And more people will be able to protect themselves with BoClean being free.
--
Team Discovery
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111685 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:35:25 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111666 K McAleavey : Whoops! Sticky fingers after too many hours once again ... you're correct ... I'm STILL trying to figure out how to pronounce his LAST name but am too embarassed to ask. :)

But the misspelling does help me to pronounce it properly to his face and I *really* like the guy and don't want to get that wrong too. Me needs sleep but dropped by and couldn't believe that all the naysaying was still going on in earnest. :(
--
Kevin McAleavey submissions@nsclean.com
»www.nsclean.com


Makers of BOClean]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111666 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:31:33 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111593 anon : Hi Kevin,

Isn't is Melih not Mehli?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111593 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:18:14 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111580 K McAleavey : THANKS, guy! I know we've both been on opposite sides of reality and I'll be the first to admit that with so MUCH malware and me being the only one left to do all of the work the past many months, BOClean has been forced to languish as a result of no time for code. There was a LOT of good kernel code that I never had time to complete and for now, first thing we do is some minor imrpovements to 4.22 for release as COMODO BOClean 4.23 in order to honor the change. Once all of this malware analysis is off my butt, FIRST order of business is to finish so much code I'd started only to never have the time to finish. As soon as that's done we'll finally HAVE our "5.0" that we never had a chance to do.

And once THAT'S done, COMODO's AV will become like BOClean ... but one thing done properly at a time. Look to COMODO's firewall, BOClean's lost cookies will be in there probably before it hits the AV ... so many things in a state of flux, so little time. :)

While we were shopping around looking for money to keep BOClean lit, we showed a number of other companies a very rudimentary bit of code where a piece of the future BOClean came up before the kernel itself. But knowing that if those we showed it to didn't buy us or fund us, they'd have the rosetta stone itself. Now that belongs to COMODO who got to see the ENTIRE code of what WE code-named "ROOTO" ... heh. Pity there's so many hosers in this "business" who couldn't see beyond their same old tired tactics and "me too, AV's do this, this is the ONLY way to go."

4.23 will not be THAT much of an improvement. Once I don't have to do malware anymore, THEN we fire off the afterburners and that should be done in a couple of months or less. I'd rather put the serious stuff into what's already a winner, COMODO's firewall for now and then bring that AV up to something that will embarass Eugene.

Sorry, but Yuri's compiler is STILL broken ... if you KNOW what to look for. (grin)
--
Kevin McAleavey submissions@nsclean.com
»www.nsclean.com


Makers of BOClean]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111580 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:14:30 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111547 fcukdat : Hey Kev

First off congratulations for seeking to better your software and now best of all making it free so it will be more widely used and protect many more folks on the WWW :)

You mention Yuri and his bots,glad you've been all over his creations with a size 12 stomp but what i am curious to know is how long before BOC can whoop PE386's A,B and C Rustock's ?

Yuri's creation's as of yet do not bypass software firewalls,Rustock dose and as such represent a bigger security risk should they become more widespread.

I mentioned it before but can't help that Yuri's freinds missed a trick putting out Wincom32 and not Rustock B as the dropped bot,although admittebly there are still so many victims out there still backdoored by it :(

Anyhows all the best in your new lab and where can i send new specimens for your inspection once the free version has been released ?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111547 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:05:21 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111523 K McAleavey : Comodo HAS a BOClean forum now - sorry I haven't even had time to open an account there where I *work* ... heh. My FIRST order of business is working with a crew of VERY talented analysts who have AMAZED me in their ability to grasp what I've taught them *SO* quickly ... I'm expecting that somewhere by this coming weekend, I'll not need to be doing that anymore, they're THAT capable now that they've learned my tricks. And that will be a GREAT burden off my shoulders after all these years!

But I'd encourage people to go over there, and say what you're saying here and on Wilders and elsewhere. Nancy and I would have NEVER done this were it not for the fact that Mehli has demonstrated to us the sincerity of HIS commitment and that of an absolutely WONDERFUL bunch of people he's surrounded himself with before he ever talked to us. I've listened to the concerns of others before stepping into there and he's satisfactorily explained each and every question to me and Nancy.

Lemme put it to you THIS way ... if any of this was about MONEY, I was offered *multiple* six figures by 180 solutions and a few of the "Russkies" with all nancy and I know to write rootkits, burden people with malware and get RICH doing so. It would have been WAY too easy if that was where we were at. And just got ANOTHER offer just yesterday to "go over to the dark side" ... for all some of our competitors have raised as bogus issues about my "morals" in years past, proof is in the pudding and ten years of it. I *starved* (quite literally) doing what I've been doing. And while I won't be rich doing what I'm going to be doing, at least I will be able to sleep at night (for a change, heh) KNOWING that I'll be continuing to keep my word (same for Nancy) and neither of us will have to worry about stab wounds in the middle of the night either. :)

COMODO has actually been around for almost as long as PSC has, just doing different things. Now that they're making some money, Mehli has the opportunity to SPEND some of that doing what WE believe in. If WE were still making money like we did in the 90's, we'd be doing the SAME thing out of gratitude for having money to do it with. The problems with the net are unfortunately the result of people having little or no protection on their machines in the first place. And having LESS of a clue. What's got US psyched is that if BOClean and the other things we've had to sit on owing to lack of time can be given away for free and COMODO can attract corporate money in what they otherwise do, then it's truly win-win for everyone. THAT feels GOOD after all we've been through the past few years!

But should COMODO break their promise (no worries about it here) then I am outta there in a heartbeat ... yeah, they bought our reputation but I can't reveal what other morsels they've bought that we were stuck sitting on the past couple of years owing to the inability to find the time to develop it. Read Mehli's comments once again ... THIS is the big promise ... all that undone code will FINALLY get done and it is every bit as significant as what BOClean meant in 1997.

Better stop lest it start smelling like potted meat ... but compare where we've ended up compared to my good friend and colleague Uncle Wayne and TDS ... compare to what's left of "The Cleaner" ... THEY were our "competitors" back when we started and we were ALL close friends. No room or interest in "cut-throat" back then, there was WORK to be done that the biggies weren't doing. And what was ALL of our collective rewards? Ask a brontosaurus. :(

And what's left today now among those we leave behind for a better solution? Same old, same old. Nah, this is another century ... it DESERVES a better answer.
--
Kevin McAleavey submissions@nsclean.com
»www.nsclean.com


Makers of BOClean]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111523 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:58:47 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111494 StraitShoot :
said by K McAleavey See Profile :

I've been hired up to make COMODO's AV better, I'll be in charge of that.
Hell it needs it!

Comodo's AV was very weak and what a memory hog! I'll be watching this baby like a hawk,...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111494 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:51:13 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111463 madirish :
said by K McAleavey See Profile :

Heh. Nah, this mad Irishman will be the first to tell you that BOClean is merely another continuation of the SAME problem as the AV's and all the other "anti-whatevers"
I never used your product and I just wanted to ask you some simple questions-things I didn't understand,I had gotten interested in BOClean from this thread-thanks anyway and good luck.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111463 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:44:13 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111422 mers2 :
said by K McAleavey See Profile :


What we always WANTED to do (but were bogged down supporting this 1980's mentality and 1990's mentality) was to PREVENT nasties from ever happening in the first place. So now, with COMODO taking us and our stuff in, we can continue our faith with those who gave us money AND we can now finally turn our focus to things nobody else has even considered doing ... I'm serious here ... the BEST is YET to come!

And nobody got hurt ... aside from *US* ...
Kevin, Thanks for replying here. You'll have to understand the negativity towards Comodo as they are relatively new - and unlike yourself, have yet to prove themselves. Only a natural response when a valuable, trusted product gets sold to a company not really known. I think you and Nancy quieted a lot of that with assurances you are still behind the product and are vouching for Comodo.

You and Nancy have provided an excellent product with outstanding service for years. Many thanks and best wishes for the future. Comodo better keep it's word, or it will have a lot of us who love BoClean and care about you and Nancy to answer to. :D
--
Team Discovery
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111422 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:34:54 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111397 K McAleavey : Heh. Nah, this mad Irishman will be the first to tell you that BOClean is merely another continuation of the SAME problem as the AV's and all the other "anti-whatevers" ... the ONE thing that made us different from the rest was that I didn't even BOTHER with a "scanner" in our design because if everyone shares the same signature-based mentality and went for the file system, and the ONLY difference between one file scanner and another was how quickly a signature got added (and we did well there) then why (aside from a couple of day's time) would you expect US to find a new variant when whatever you were using didn't either?

In OUR design, we didn't really bother with the file system since if the AV missed it, we probably would have too ... we went for the kernel and system memory. And in the past few years, some others have seen our wisdom and adopted it as well in THEIR stuff. What TRULY made us different was that instead of just grabbing some random strings and made signatures out of them, we took the trouble to actually LEARN our opponents and concentrated on *their* unique traits. That's what allowed us to anticipate their next move and those things they wouldn't change.

For all the sheer volume of nasties, there really aren't all THAT many "hired guns" out there writing malware. If there's 200 total, I'd be impressed. But the various authors who do this are pretty consistent in their METHODS and that's what BOClean concentrated on. Same dewd who wrote Gromozon, VXGames, Zlobs, DollarRevenues and Cabanieris is the exact same dewd who wrote "STORM" recently. I believe his name is Yuri and he's in Ukraine. Does things that have ALWAYS been consistent for analysts who bothered to spot the configuration problem in his compiler once you remove the randomizers he uses to fool file scanners and break the QWAP out of "generic unpackers" used by the Anti's ... but in MEMORY his stuff is always the same and it's been going on for three years now.

So SHOULD you dump your AV, AT, A-hole, whatever? Not yet ... but thanks to Mehli and COMODO, the day when I will actually ENCOURAGE that isn't very far away ... COMODO has a firewall and some VERY talented folks ... and the SOLUTION is going to be in the 3 version of COMODO's firewall. :)

And then ... it'll get EVEN BETTER! I've been hired up to make COMODO's AV better, I'll be in charge of that. BOClean will be a standalone as always, and it will be in the AV which will give me file hooks we never had. But the whole purpose of this is SOLELY to assuage the mindset that you've got to scan for files and be a bit more successful at that. But the bottom line is, why let them get infected in the FIRST place? :)

OK, so what I bring is a mop and a pail to add to all this since that's what people have come to expect since the 80's. Like I said though, we're going to turn the world on its ear with what's already in the pipe. And then we collectively "get serious" about it from there. I have SEEN the future, and it's going to be a whole lot better than it is now.
--
Kevin McAleavey submissions@nsclean.com
»www.nsclean.com


Makers of BOClean]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111397 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:27:45 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111383 Name Game :
said by madirish See Profile :

Thanks NG but I wanted Kevin to reply (no offense to you)-cause I also wanted to ask him about Heuristics
I do not take offense..not even to a question as yours..but now you do have the answer..and if you go to the Privacy Software Corporation site you will read the same. So now ask the specific question you have in mind about heuristics.

:D
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111383 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:24:35 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111344 madirish :
said by Name Game See Profile :

said by madirish See Profile :

said by K McAleavey See Profile :

"File scanning" was a waste of time (you're going to look for a problem ONLY when your machine is SO hosed you finally noticed?) ten years ago ... and what we offered was way ahead of its time THEN. As a "backup" to your AV which should have stopped it in the first place but obviously didn't (as many can attest from personal experience) ... this isn't the 80's anymore, it isn't even the 90's anymore.
Hi Kevin.Are you saying that we should dump our AV,AT then and only use BOClean?

Not trying to start anything-I just really want to know.

edit:added "you"
No he did not..he said your AV should have stopped it and BOClean was then your back up. Many times the AV with it name type sigs..not updated fast enough missed many badboys in any real time protection..while BOClean then caught them.

Kevin always advocated..keep your AV and AT..BOClean was your back up.
Thanks NG but I wanted Kevin to reply (no offense to you)-cause I also wanted to ask him about Heuristics]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111344 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:17:33 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111317 Name Game :
said by madirish See Profile :

said by K McAleavey See Profile :

"File scanning" was a waste of time (you're going to look for a problem ONLY when your machine is SO hosed you finally noticed?) ten years ago ... and what we offered was way ahead of its time THEN. As a "backup" to your AV which should have stopped it in the first place but obviously didn't (as many can attest from personal experience) ... this isn't the 80's anymore, it isn't even the 90's anymore.
Hi Kevin.Are you saying that we should dump our AV,AT then and only use BOClean?

Not trying to start anything-I just really want to know.

edit:added "you"
No he did not..he said your AV should have stopped it and BOClean was then your back up. Many times the AV with it name type sigs..not updated fast enough missed many badboys in any real time protection..while BOClean then caught them.

Kevin always advocated..keep your AV and AT..BOClean was your back up.
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/
Missing Kids
»www.missingkids.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111317 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:11:00 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111291 Name Game : Good Decision.

Best to you both my friend..glad you have the ability now to continue "flipping switches and circuit breakers" before the compressor get's up to speed ..big hugs to bingbong. ;)
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111291 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:05:48 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111250 madirish :
said by K McAleavey See Profile :

"File scanning" was a waste of time (you're going to look for a problem ONLY when your machine is SO hosed you finally noticed?) ten years ago ... and what we offered was way ahead of its time THEN. As a "backup" to your AV which should have stopped it in the first place but obviously didn't (as many can attest from personal experience) ... this isn't the 80's anymore, it isn't even the 90's anymore.
Hi Kevin.Are you saying that we should dump our AV,AT then and only use BOClean?

Not trying to start anything-I just really want to know.

edit:added "you"]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111250 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:58:19 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111099 K McAleavey : The description of "shopping it around" actually meant that we were looking for funding to remain independent and to have money to hire additional programmers and analysts. However, "file scanning" and "anti-anything" is a software mindset that's been going since the early 1980's and is passe ... and with so many "newbies" who've gotten into this in the last couple of years seeing some sort of goldmine in this (Kaspersky and others doing freebies should be a clue as to how BAD this market is, you CAN'T compete with "free" no matter HOW good you are) has evaporated any potential of investment in us or anyone else.

So the next step was trying to partner with someone else who had resources we could draw upon or an outright sale given that nobody's making any money at this and the workload just kept going further up and up. So our FIRST responsibility was to those who'd paid us and to whom we'd made a promise. Kept us awake TOO many nights ... we didn't want to go the way of TDS and a few others of similar vintage - either pulling the rug out or just giving up while remaining a walking corpse.

I really can't fathom all this negativity - the amount we "cashed out for" isn't going to buy either of us "a place in the sun" here ... it was NEVER about the money, it was about Nancy and my personal responsibility to those "few" who actually paid us to do what we do and our own sense of honor about that and what our "mission" has been for over ten years now.

COMODO, for all the naysaying, has agreed to HONOR our commitment to all AND to ensure that what we'd had to put on the back burner because we just couldn't DO it anymore will see the light of day. "File scanning" was a waste of time (you're going to look for a problem ONLY when your machine is SO hosed you finally noticed?) ten years ago ... and what we offered was way ahead of its time THEN. As a "backup" to your AV which should have stopped it in the first place but obviously didn't (as many can attest from personal experience) ... this isn't the 80's anymore, it isn't even the 90's anymore.

What we always WANTED to do (but were bogged down supporting this 1980's mentality and 1990's mentality) was to PREVENT nasties from ever happening in the first place. So now, with COMODO taking us and our stuff in, we can continue our faith with those who gave us money AND we can now finally turn our focus to things nobody else has even considered doing ... I'm serious here ... the BEST is YET to come!

And nobody got hurt ... aside from *US* ...
--
Kevin McAleavey submissions@nsclean.com
»www.nsclean.com


Makers of BOClean]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18111099 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:30:08 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18110450 Jer03 : Anyone know when the free BoClean will be available?
Thanks,
Jerry]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18110450 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 13:12:16 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18108389 Mowergun :
said by Mowergun See Profile :

FROM:
»Re: BO Clean question

Logically I know that kevin and Nancy cannot keep this up forever, someday they will want to retire. Some day some security software company may make them an offer they cannot refuse. I hope that day is a long time in the future.

2006-08-19 12:00:53

Little did I know in August of last year when I made that post, that Kevin and Nancy were already shopping BOClean around. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18108389 Tue, 03 Apr 2007 00:56:04 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18102667 JTM1051 : Your AV's resident scanner should catch the nasties first and probably never see any action by BOClean until a nasty (trojan/malware) has been encrypted, repacked, patched, hex edited or otherwise modified to be obscure and sneak by AV's defs.

The synopsis at bottom of the BOCLean page:
"Think of your antivirus as a burglar alarm. BOClean is a motion detector."

For a better explanation of how BOClean protects your system, read the first three paragraphs at BOClean in normal operation.

In the "Compatatives" page at AV-Comparatives, scroll down page till you see the "Anti-Trojan Comparative 2006 March 2006".

In the report's section "4. Some questions and answers"
Question 1: If dedicated Anti-Trojan products have lower on-demand detection rates than common Anti-Virus, why it still makes sense to use them?

Answer: Anti-Trojan products may not have the best on-demand detection rates, but usually they offer additional tools to identify active malware or to remove the malware from the system.

Some products have Intrusion Detection Systems to block the malware while execution based on its behaviour (behaviour blockers) or are very good at detecting dialers or spyware (not included in this test). Other Anti-Trojans products may for example have a memory scanner, monitor and clean the registry and/or have tools to monitor start-up programs, current connections, running processes, etc. ..."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18102667 Mon, 02 Apr 2007 00:47:43 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101807 richter35 : Yes there is no problem, thanks for clarifying that. It does what it does, and it does clean active malware when present upon install. That's what I wanted to hear. I'll stop at that. Thanks.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101807 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 21:34:28 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101616 Cudni :
said by r355 :

The "problem" with BOClean, it is only good (correct me if I'm wrong as I have not used it) to stop from getting infected when you run a nasty. ...
...I would like to keep it off my computer in the first place and at least have software have a shot at fixing it. ...
So not a problem then?

Cudni
--
Some are born to failure, others achieve it, all deserve it.
Help yourself so God can help you.
MVP, Microsoft Windows Security 2006-2007]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101616 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 20:55:39 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101582 Cudni : Installing it after the infection will help remove the badware it knows about and is running in memory

Cudni]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101582 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 20:49:50 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101430 richter35 : Mele20, I know it's BS, and I did not claim there is anything wrong with the software. I merely said I prefer for AV/AT to catch it while I browse folders, even if it's not harmful. I am not mortally afraid of viruses. I do not run anything on-access nor do I scan my email (Gmail and Yahoo filter it anyway). I am aware that malware is not harmful until it's active, but...I can also handle it even if it's detected by my AV and I know that it contains malware. Simply put it on ignore list, but I'd like to be notified nonetheless.

You say I'm wrong and it's BS and yet you confirm that BOClean will not act unless malware is ran. I just don't get it. I just said that it does that and *I* don't like it. And I'm labeled as spreading BS. I did not say it's faulty in any way or that it will not catch infection once executed.

Second, I said it's nothing new...well, unless I am completely wrong (and I am not saying I am not), it doesn't do anything that special that let's say Ewido on-access scanner wouldn't do, or...? *I'm just asking a simple clarification*

Third...I did not state machine would get infected while BOClean was running. I simply asked, which I did not put in a good way for which I apologize as you can clearly see English is not my first language and I'm not Security MVM/MVP, whether or not installing BOClean after infection will make a difference and if it would clean infections already present? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101430 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 20:21:29 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101332 tempnexus : Exactly it's like CDC being deadly afraid and warning the public about all the viruses it keeps stored for research. The viruses and bacteria have not been disseminated thus cause no threat to the general public as a result they do no have to be reported. However, they will be reported and mitigated as soon as they somehow escape the confinement or are somehow introduced into the general populace.
Same goes for Boclean...Boclean does not care about stuff that can't infect you, it cares about immediate danger items aka the items that are residing in the memory and stealing/dealing/whatever the information you have in your system.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101332 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 19:58:34 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101134 Mele20 :
said by r355 :

The "problem" with BOClean, it is only good (correct me if I'm wrong as I have not used it) to stop from getting infected when you run a nasty. It's hopeless once machine is infected, and it stands still until you actually run something. Some might like this approach and see it as something groundbreaking, but I personally don't (besides, any av/at have on-access scanner anyway). I would like to keep it off my computer in the first place and at least have software have a shot at fixing it.
That's a pile of BS. I have about 500 viruses on my machine. They haven't done diddlysquat to my machine. I'm not concerned about them at all. Why am I not worried? Simple. They are in zip files and I have never unzipped/executed any of them. They are completely harmless until executed. If I did execute any my real time AV would pounce on them and stop them. If any got by my AV and I had BoClean installed it would stop those when they tried to execute.

Unreasonable fear of viruses doesn't make sense. Beginners and average users probably should have an unreasonable fear and that is who the AV companies aim their bloated software at which has http scanners to keep those nasties totally at bay. Those of us who know enough to read and post here should have a more reasonable respect for viruses...fear them but not in a hysterical manner. I once feared them as you appear to do. I had the great fortune to be taught by a master here about how to safely handle them. I don't do much handling like a researcher would because anyone can have a slip-up (and you frequently need to have your AV turned off so you can handle them) and if the AV was turned off when the slipup occured then you better have a current True Image handy.

So, I don't "push my luck" but at the same time, I don't harbour irrational fear of viruses getting anywhere near my computer because I understand that it is only when they are executed that they pose a problem. Under the "master's" tuteledge, I was even able to handle one virus and submit it to my ISP and ISP headquarters in Virginia and then to Symantec and back and forth...lots of handling...because Symantec wasn't detecting and they are the vendor on my ISP's national email gateways. I was sort of amused at how fearful the person dealing with this issue at my ISP's national headquarters in Virginia was regarding my sending the virus to him. The head of local tech support in Hawaii was just as fearful and they set elaborate precautions before I could send it....gee, it was perfectly safe. I zipped it and password protected it, yet because they didn't really understand how a virus infects they were convinced it would infect their computers just by the zipped, password protected attachment appearing in their email. Amazing.

As for BoClean, what is there to clean after BoClean stops it from executing in memory?
--
"If you want to do DRM on a PC then you need to treat the user as the enemy." Ross Anderson in "`Trusted Computing' Frequently Asked Questions"

»www.msfirefox.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18101134 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 19:16:32 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18099397 Martinus :
said by John2g See Profile :

even tataye is a BOClean customer :)
You mean a paying customer?

And welcome back, lad
--
Si naciste pa' martillo del cielo te caen los clavos]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18099397 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 13:15:49 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098963 anon :
said by John2g See Profile :

The "problem" is only in your mind. You are incorrect.
That's why I used the quotes. It's not a problem per se but that, to my knowledge that it does not act until malware is active. Now, without saying it's not good or anything, I just don't like it. And I must say that I've no knowledge of it's disinfection abilities. I thought it was only good at preventing malware not actually being used in cleaning it afterwards.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098963 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 11:49:03 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098920 Name Game :
said by madirish See Profile :

"Kevin McAleavey is First Scientist to Detect New Strain of Malware which Mutates and Jumps from Computers to Humans"

read more here:»www.castlecops.com/

-just made me laugh-
And he does it with such finesse even other passengers can understand. ;)

FILEDATE: 2007-03-31 07:51:20 (UTC)

CURRENT VERSION OF BOCLEAN IS 4.22.002
Listings do not include variants which are already covered. As of this date, Privacy Software's BOClean analysts have seen a total of 274,706 specific variations of various malware and behaviors as well as additional characteristics and components, all of which are covered in the Update file. This does not include "duplicates" and "copycats" as typically reported by others as "unique" based upon a lack of an "MD5 signature match." Add so-called "traces" and handling each individual piece as a separate "signature" detection as is done by our competitors and BOClean is well past 1,800,000 "signatures" or more as a quantification of "effectiveness by numbers." Our definition of "unique" is based upon specific code written by an original "single author" for use by others. The relative scarcity of "unique authors" is taken advantage of in our design by our ability to "know the actual author" rather than their varying output. Over ten years, we've gotten to know many of them personally in their designs. And the "trojan authors" of yore are today's scammers.

Our definition of "Variants" are numerous "new" malwares already covered by BOClean which have been modified by various techniques designed to elude traditional "file-scanning" software. Our "count" of variants should be considered to be far lower than reality since our "variant count" is based SOLELY upon variants we've actually seen. The number "in the wild" is substantially higher given that BOClean already detected them and thus no "investigations" were required. Since BOClean utilizes multiple unique methods of detection per malware, variants (even those "unknown" or "zero-day") are already covered by BOClean if they use already obvious techniques even with obfuscation. BOClean also stands guard without slowing or interfering with your system, connection speed or software and actually repairs the system after an attack, restoring it to its original condition. No manual editing is required. We STOP the nasty.

Please also note that various antivirus companies will create their own names for malware and thus those unique names may not appear in our listing. Wherever possible, we use the ORIGINAL names given to the malware by their original authors at the time of release. Many malwares are also variations of earlier versions and given new names when "discovered" at a later time by the antivirus companies. Therefore the absence of a particularly named "virus" in our listing does not necessarily mean that it is not covered. Since we tend to be "first discoverers" we tend to use the names provided by the original authors or a name based upon the functionality of new nasties, or in the rare case where we cover it without knowing what it actually does, by its first filename when discovered.

Where possible, we might go back at a later time and adopt a name used by ALL vendors for a particular malware if we use a generic name upon first discovery. From time to time, as the industry settles on a SPECIFIC "universal name," we might rename previously named malware to the more widely expected and known names in order to make research by our customers more convenient.

Certain conventions in our naming though might be helpful. If the name of the trojan contains the letters "ROOT" in the name, then this is a "rootkit." If the name contains "BOT" then it's one of numerous "bots" whether by worm or by exploit. We go out of our way to try to preserve the name or type of bot such as "MYBOT" (known as "MYTOB") or SPAMBOT, IRCBOT, IPC$BOT or other descriptive names to provide an idea of what KIND of bot a particular detection is related to. If the name contains "SPYSCAM" then it's one of the many fake "anti-nasty" foistwares of dubious "antispyware" ilk. If it's "BANCOBRA" then it's one of numerous "banking/credit card fraud" programs, the origin among Brazilian criminals. "Banker" is a familiar comparison among some AV's for this type of malware. "KEYLOG" in the name indicates that it's a keylogger and there are other "keywords" in our naming conventions which indicate the TYPE of malware. Then there's the ZLOB'S which are CWS in a fresh incarnation of NEW coders and their hiding behind "free codecs for porn, jokes, whatever." Lacking any of these conventions in our naming though, then a name in the listing can be considered a unique "backdoor" or "dropper" of other malware. Wherever possible, the corporate names of spyware/adware companies are used in order to SPECIFICALLY identify the origin of malware. "$REVENUE," "CWS" and others are such cases. Many OTHER vendors refuse to name names of criminal syndicates. We DO.

*UNIQUE* Malware detected and purged automatically by BOClean v4.22:

»www.nsclean.com/trolist.html
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098920 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 11:41:42 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098702 madirish : "Kevin McAleavey is First Scientist to Detect New Strain of Malware which Mutates and Jumps from Computers to Humans"

read more here:»www.castlecops.com/

-just made me laugh-]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098702 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 11:04:17 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098621 John2g :
said by Name Game See Profile :

So have fun with your 'beasties'..maybe I can even get tataye to make you a few new ones or loan you a few that never hit the stree's in his blackhat days...Eddie does not live in lost vegas..and the golden oldies are still spinning. :D
even tataye is a BOClean customer :)
--
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098621 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 10:45:11 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098430 Name Game : Fcudak..I do not personally help people with HJT log in any forum for the very reason I know 90% of the time not only where they picked up the vector..but also how and where they have been surfing. ;) Also to many these days who ask for hjt help..never keep their OS updated..or Java..and many have pirated OS.

But if anyone is serious about security..and you can hold back yourself from trying to get Boclean install to clean up some zoo..I suggest your get one machine infected by going to a website or other real world means.. just like those who do post HJT logs and then do your experiment again.

You and I both know website and vectors where this would be fruitless..since BOClean is certainly not infalable..but if you posted your hijackthis log first..someone could certainly tell and make a descision..on what it can do..before you post the next log.
You just might be surprised. ;)
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098430 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 10:02:42 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098350 CajunTek :
said by fcukdat See Profile :

said by Name Game See Profile :

A learned friend suggested....

"When Comodo releases BOClean it may really change the whole landscape of the HiJackthis world. For instance we'll have to change our "Guidelines" to

1. Download and install Comodo's BOClean
2. Have a nice day"

;)
NG Most of what you scribed in your reply to my post is correct but rather flies in the face of your *learned* freinds advice you posted above.

Do they need to install the software after your prescribed R&R coz that is missing from the learned freinds advice ;)
I don't think I would do that way... But once the OP is clean.. I may very well add BOClean to the reccomended free apps for the unenlightened.... (AKA folks who.. click on anything...)...
--
da Cajun Darn I hate Malware]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098350 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 09:39:46 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098311 fcukdat :
said by Name Game See Profile :

A learned friend suggested....

"When Comodo releases BOClean it may really change the whole landscape of the HiJackthis world. For instance we'll have to change our "Guidelines" to

1. Download and install Comodo's BOClean
2. Have a nice day"

;)
NG Most of what you scribed in your reply to my post is correct but rather flies in the face of your *learned* freinds advice you posted above.

Do they need to install the software after your prescribed R&R coz that is missing from the learned freinds advice ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098311 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 09:30:16 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098198 Name Game :
said by Longboard See Profile :

I put this as a new thread but it's too good not to drop here as well:

»www.comodo.com/news/press_releas···_07.html

MAke sure you read the whole thing
?safe hex advice
LOL
:D
If it is Biodegradable..BOClean is still your better biffer.
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098198 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 08:51:42 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098183 Longboard : I put this as a new thread but it's too good not to drop here as well:

»www.comodo.com/news/press_releas···_07.html

MAke sure you read the whole thing
?safe hex advice
LOL
:D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098183 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 08:46:41 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098180 anon : We're not talking about suites or other others here. We're talking about BOClean.

said by Name Game See Profile :

BOClean has taken a path of a different drummer from the get go with technology that works..if it did not..we wouldn't be having this conversation.
If it worked then we wouldn't be having this discussion at all. If something works, it works. You wouldn't be saying otherwise and you wouldn't argue otherwise.

The "problem" with BOClean, it is only good (correct me if I'm wrong as I have not used it) to stop from getting infected when you run a nasty. It's hopeless once machine is infected, and it stands still until you actually run something. Some might like this approach and see it as something groundbreaking, but I personally don't (besides, any av/at have on-access scanner anyway). I would like to keep it off my computer in the first place and at least have software have a shot at fixing it. We all know it's impossible to have one-click fix it all AV/AT. Noone ever claimed it's possible and AV companies play on card use AV not to get infected in the first place rather than, load your comp with viruses, install our product and we'll fix it for you with ease.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098180 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 08:46:01 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098103 Name Game : Well you know fcukdat..BOCleans was stopping virus, trojans and malware even before the AV's and AT's finally picked up on the fact it was not business as usual and scrambled to find NEW Engines and their famous heuristic to even keep up with the bad boys when they went commercial.. joined forces to make 'lots of money' and the reason there was even ever any HJT in the first place is that they all just could not keep up and really help their users.

Infact, they all clamoured for the hijackthis experts to send them a copy of the badboys they found.. just to keep up with the onslought..with a 'please wrap it up and send me a copy.'
Still today they really all can NOT keep up..so they have the famous SUITES..with a "now we can do it all under one roof" senerio. Then there were the days when the AV's and Antispyware guys decided all they really had to do is disable the badboy from running anyway they could so they never really cleaned all of the penetration off the PC..they just crippled it enough to stop the madness and left all kinds of crap still on the users PC. Some AV's even crippled the PC itself :( and the user could not even get back on the internet. Then there were those "stand alone cleaning tools"..with Panda in the lead with their PQREMOVE.. working in a modified DOS since no one could figure out how to remove some badboys without a reboot.
"If Norton or the rest could not stop it..then down load pqremove."
Then the REST of the AV companies followed the theme.
Then you had the phase where the badboys would actually disable your AV with a blink of an eye..or even USE IT as a vector to penetrate your PC since they did not even know how to protect their own AV from exploits as they promised to stand guard on your PC to protect your OS..some of those well know" third party" AV's had such crappy engines and code they even added to your risk of being infected.

My anology here for ya..is that if they had all realy been doing their jobs..there would never have been a need for HJT in the first place. But that process with help from an expert cleaned it all off better than the commercial companies. :D

But as you lick your lips on rootkits..which again the SUITE Companies still can not handle effectively.. it brings us now around to the fact that rootkits are not really all .exe but rather badboys standing in the wings waiting for the rest of the commands to happen. So now again we have all these "standalone cleaners and detectors" that came along with arguments still today which is the best antirookit thingie. :D

But you do really know the BOClean is "No doubt about it the software was a very good realtime Guard to block stuff from going native.The previous owners put in a great deal of effort on staying on top of emerging malwares to keep it that way thus providing a very good defending package."

I am not really interested in going into details with you on Gromozon or Rustock or playing a silly game of loading your "zoo" and then installing BOClean..fact is anyone in their right mind would be reformating and reinstalling a machime like that in the first place...with a couple "LOOPS" of a good hard drive cleaner in the boot sector even before the reinstall. People are fooling themselves if the think HJT fully cleaned their PC..same goes for all the AT..AV..and SUITE "ME TOO" HOUSES..since once you have been compromised..the game is really over..all that cleaning is relly going to do..is get you back on the road so you can be infected again..cause you really do NOT know how to locked down your OS or even tried..and you have been conditioned by all these sales pitches..not to even worry about that part.."we will make sure you are 100% protected and it is all Microsoft" fault. :D

So have fun with your 'beasties'..maybe I can even get tataye to make you a few new ones or loan you a few that never hit the stree's in his blackhat days...Eddie does not live in lost vegas..and the golden oldies are still spinning. :D

BOClean has taken a path of a different drummer from the get go with technology that works..if it did not..we wouldn't be having this conversation.
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/
Missing Kids
»www.missingkids.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18098103 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 08:06:10 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097989 fcukdat :
said by norwegian See Profile :

5 minutes with any program does nothing. Where's Fcukdat, and that malware collection. Some tests maybe.
Reading and chuckling,licks lips :D

OhNoes!!!112 my puter is backdoored by Rustock B yet protected by BOC :(

Hey NG i read back earliar in the thread you were making reference to BOC being the HJT log helpers saviour,i'm second guessing from that statement that you have not introduced the software to a heavily infected computer too often to verify that position;)

No doubt about it the software was a very good realtime Guard to block stuff from going native.The previous owners put in a great deal of effort on staying on top of emerging malwares to keep it that way thus providing a very good defending package.

It did choke on blocking Gromozon from installing for a while despite positively identifying the trojan but then IRC that was resolved with release of a new build.

My own findings with reguards the software back a wee while and post infected machine was somewhat opposite to its realtime blocking effectiveness.I loaded up my machine with a massive amount of crud c/o DR(topaff.exe)and then watched as installing BOC as a cleaner it went into to headfit of choking on known *Vundo's,Qoo's* and other assorted bots that it would detect,attempt clean only to loop again :uhh:

Anyhow a new build and a new set of exotic beasties to test with(and some golden oldies)i'm looking forward to testing it yet again :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097989 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 06:41:02 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097954 norwegian : 5 minutes with any program does nothing. Where's Fcukdat, and that malware collection. Some tests maybe. Just remember the winsock and some registry zones will be reset if you have that setting enabled. All in a small package. Bigger and faster isn't always better :)

Just remember it's just one layer of the onion, or an extra pair of socks on a cold day.

Dadkins, test mate, test.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097954 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 05:56:36 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097836 Mowergun :
said by Mele20 See Profile :

BTW, I was just reading the thread at Comodo forums and the members there are totally confused ...worse than you..regarding the reason BoClean never had a trial but I'm tired of explaining so someone else can explain to them...I saw Tony Klein and Mowergun there. They can explain. :)

Comodo has a forum set up for Bo...Not open yet but here is the address:

»forums.comodo.com/index.php?PHPS···3.0.html
I gave up on page three of this thread. :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097836 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 03:26:23 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097835 dadkins : No, I got the point, people keep rehashing it.
The lawsuit and the lack of a trial... all history.
Actually, it was all history years ago... but we will forget about that.

There is no trial because, the file that was sent to me, will run on *ANY* PC without any verification or license key.
I didn't enter in any key, yet it is running fine!
It even updated!
For there to have been a trial, there would have had to be some sort of cut-off.
Well, there isn't one!

That whole "Private Club" rhetoric is old and tired.
Too many other Resident AT programs are out there that do the same as what BOC is doing.
One catch though, the "other guys" can actually scan the computer AS WELL AS monitor what runs in the memory.

"They" have trials too, I know! I have tried them!
I even OWN one of them!
But, like I have stated several times, *I* don't need a resident AT - ANY resident AT!
Not even BOC! :o
Yeah, I said it! It's the truth!

Funny, I am not the only person that has survived all this time without BOC...
Anyone care to guess as to why that is?
I can't call it myself... but all three of my laptops purr right along. ;)
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097835 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 03:26:08 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097824 Mele20 : I'm telling you that I personally don't think it bodes well for BoClean to be free. But I feel that way because I don't have a good warm tummy feeling about Melih and it all will depend on him now. When the sleazebags see that BoClean no longer has protection of the law from being sued over detections and the sleazebags approach Melih and ask for "exceptions" will they be turned away? Probably, at first at least. Will they then sue? Probably. What will Melih do then? Stand up to them in court never? once? many times? finally cave? I don't know...that is the 64 million dollar question that we all have to wait to find out the answer.

BTW, I was just reading the thread at Comodo forums and the members there are totally confused ...worse than you..regarding the reason BoClean never had a trial but I'm tired of explaining so someone else can explain to them...I saw Tony Klein and Mowergun there. They can explain. :)

Comodo has a forum set up for Bo...Not open yet but here is the address:

»forums.comodo.com/index.php?PHPS···3.0.html
--
"If you want to do DRM on a PC then you need to treat the user as the enemy." Ross Anderson in "`Trusted Computing' Frequently Asked Questions"

»www.msfirefox.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097824 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 03:16:31 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097816 mers2 :
said by dadkins See Profile :

Ok Mele, what do you call it NOW that BOClean will be FREE to anyone?

None of y'all want to answer that... Being free to anyone sure isn't "A Private Club".

Are you all telling me that BOClean now, since it will be free to anyone and not "A Private Club", that it will be a lesser program?

That because it is now free(as opposed to a trial) is is different?

Ya ain't making any sense! :huh:
You missed the point - they were immune to the lawsuits under NY law because of the "private club" protection. That is lost with the free version. That is why the early posts were concerned with whether Commodo would cave to legal threats that BoClean didn't have to worry about.
--
Team Discovery
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097816 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 03:08:10 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097798 dadkins :
said by Blackbird See Profile :

said by Name Game See Profile :

"...whereas other antimalware had surrendered to bogus legal claims (but eventually relented after we won the decision) and dropped the detection of malware, BOCLEAN is under no such legal obligation. We act on behalf of our "subscribers" BECAUSE there are no "free to the general public" releases of BOClean. THAT provision is what keeps everybody safe even if it costs us "easy sales." ...
Hmm. I can't help but wonder how that strategy will play once the product becomes "free"... :huh:
Everyone here is skirting that pretty good, huh.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097798 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 02:57:25 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097795 dadkins : Ok Mele, what do you call it NOW that BOClean will be FREE to anyone?

None of y'all want to answer that... Being free to anyone sure isn't "A Private Club".

Are you all telling me that BOClean now, since it will be free to anyone and not "A Private Club", that it will be a lesser program?

That because it is now free(as opposed to a trial) is is different?

Ya ain't making any sense! :huh:
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097795 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 02:56:02 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097793 rotty97 : All they have to do is charge 5 cents for a life time subscription!!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097793 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 02:54:41 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097756 Mele20 :
said by dadkins See Profile :

That makes NO sense whatsoever!
No matter how anyone wants to spin it, BOC is an Anti-Malware, right?

Ok, so they(NSClean) used that legally to get away from the makers of NetBus from suing them... I can deal with that!
Since that is all a wash now, and MANY other scanners/residents do ALSO detect NetBus, that is a WAY tired argument, isn't it?

*I* have 5 different(probably more) apps that detect NetBus and THEY never got sued, so now what?

Someone give me a LEGIT, reason upto a month ago why BOClean didn't have a trial.

COMODO buying it and now GIVING IT AWAY FOR FREE kinda trashes that tired excuse, huh?
So, is COMODO going to get sued?
No trial - the thing is going to be FREE!
Sigh. If BoClean had a trial that would mean that BoClean no longer could be LEGALLY considered a "Private Club".

Recall how Alex Eckleberry a year or so ago talked here about the sleazeballs he was fighting and Lavasoft was being sued also and other antimalware vendors were being sued/caving into demands from the sleazeballs that their product be overlooked, etc? BoClean has NEVER HAD TO WORRY ABOUT BEING SUED BY THE SLEAZEBALLS AND NOT HAVING THE FUNDS TO FIGHT THEM. Why? Because under New York law BoClean (until the sale to Comodo) was considered by the Netbus ruling to be a Private Club and a Private Club can do pretty much what it wants to please its members and cannot be sued because it "discriminates" in some way. So, the sleazeballs have NEVER had legal standing since that court ruling to sue PSClean for detecting their spyware which according to them: Gee this is not spyware...it is just a nice little proggie and gee Judge, BoClean shouldn't be detecting our neat little proggie as a nasty...we asked them nicely not to do so but they have continued to do and so Judge please bring a $50 million judgment against them because we are not spyware and they are hurting our legitimate business when they detect our nice little proggie".

How did BoClean get "Private Club" status under New York law? By never offering a trial version or free version of BoClean. I can't say it any plainer that this. Do you think Nancy and Kevin were rolling in money and would have easily been able to fight lawsuits from the sleazeballs? Because of their legal standing they never had to worry about the probability that some sleazeballs would have sued them and even if they won...it would have take a lot of money to fight the sleazeballs in court and it wouldn't have been just one sleazeball either. This Private Club protection made it so that they never had to worry about lawsuits and pressure from the sleazeballs and that is (was) unique among malware vendors.

Now you can be a devil's advocate and say well, alright. I understand now but I think this an overblown advantage they had as CounterSpy, AdAware, Spybot etc have not been forced out of business by lawsuits from the sleazeballs but we don't know how difficult it has been for them or how some antispyware vendors have caved in to the demands. I'm very happy that Kevin and Nancy never had to worry about this as they certainly had no big pile of money set aside to pay legal fees if the sleazeballs came after them which they would have done. Milh says that he has a world wide legal team and can afford to have the sleazeballs sue. If that is true, and remains true, then we all have nothing to worry about but the McAleavey's never had that luxury of piles of dough and attorneys all over the world and so for them the concept of a Private Club was sort of a godsend even if it did result in losing some sales due to users, like you, just not getting it.

If you still don't "get it"...well, I'm done here. Because if you don't get it now ....you just don't want to get it.
--
"If you want to do DRM on a PC then you need to treat the user as the enemy." Ross Anderson in "`Trusted Computing' Frequently Asked Questions"

»www.msfirefox.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097756 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 02:37:31 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097705 bettywont : tempnexus,I can second that emotion,Boclean serves me well and has been on my machines for years.Their will always be individuals who perhaps can not afford to purchase products and go for the free ones, and their are many great free products out their.Personally I found a-squared free slow and had many f/p's and conflicted with BOCLEAN.
Living in a democratic society we can make our own choices
on what products/programs we like or dislike.As I see it there is a very high majority who use and believe in Boclean on this forum. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097705 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 02:03:41 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097642 Blackbird :
said by Name Game See Profile :

"...whereas other antimalware had surrendered to bogus legal claims (but eventually relented after we won the decision) and dropped the detection of malware, BOCLEAN is under no such legal obligation. We act on behalf of our "subscribers" BECAUSE there are no "free to the general public" releases of BOClean. THAT provision is what keeps everybody safe even if it costs us "easy sales." ...
Hmm. I can't help but wonder how that strategy will play once the product becomes "free"... :huh:
--
If God wanted us to work with electrons, He'd make them big enough to see...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097642 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 01:41:41 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097534 dadkins : I hope so too!
Not for me, but for all my friends that use BOC!

;)
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097534 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 01:03:46 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097499 tempnexus : All I got to say is that from my personal experience BOCLEAN has pounced at least 20 instances over the past five years on malware that my antivirus has let through and those AV being KAV and NOD32. SO, if I did not know better I would have been infected at least 20 times and have my Identity stolen at least 5 times (let say one in 4 instances of infection my ID gets stolen). So the $30.00 I decided to pay for BOCLEAN was WELL WORTH IT.
No matter what others say, in my own personal space and my own first hand, no theories no test bull crap experience Boclean have saved my ass at least 20 times.
Take it as you will, but I was very happy with my purchase. And by the way, those 20 instances were latter added by KAV and NOD32 after I e-mailed them the files. SO no there were not FP.

All I wish now is that Boclean still remains Boclean and if it does not then I must thank Kevin and Nancy for all the help and dedication they have given me and the rest of their users and thank you Kevin and Nancy for saving my Identity and thousands of dollars that I would have spent attempting to get my life back in order.

Best of luck to you both.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097499 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:54:48 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097368 dadkins :
said by Name Game See Profile :

:D :D David,
I don't really care what you run or how many AV's or Antimalware or even Firewalls..actually have been surprised in all this that you run so many..for me I run NADA..not even BOClean..that's why I never post in those polls..and I will never start running any for if I did I would end up with corrupted copies of the badboys out there like so many zoo files I have seen. ;)

I do help many people get their current favorite working if they have cockpit error.
So, *I* need to read this thread?

»Re: BOClean has always had a trial

"Something is happening on these laptops of mine that keeps things off of them.
Is it me? Doubt it! LOL!
Is it SpywareBlaster? Could be!
Is it avast? Also, could be!
Is it Outpost? Who knows...
Those three items are All I use(SB doesn't run)... you make the call!"

Uh, yeah!

Now, I do scan weekly because of boredom, but all I ever get is cookies(said that too in this thread!).

Y'all need to lighten up!
LOL!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097368 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:17:18 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097304 EGeezer :
said by dadkins See Profile :

No lawsuits, no NetBus, no trials... FREE!

Good Night All!
David
I may have an old copy of Netbuster around.... :D
--
03:14:07 UTC Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2038 - a date that will live in infamy...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097304 Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:02:09 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097292 Name Game : :D :D David,
I don't really care what you run or how many AV's or Antimalware or even Firewalls..actually have been surprised in all this that you run so many..for me I run NADA..not even BOClean..that's why I never post in those polls..and I will never start running any for if I did I would end up with corrupted copies of the badboys out there like so many zoo files I have seen. ;)

I do help many people get their current favorite working if they have cockpit error.
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097292 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:59:30 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097288 dadkins : To all,
Have a great evening, we will chat about this a few months from now - when ANYONE that wants it will have it!

No lawsuits, no NetBus, no trials... FREE!

Good Night All!
David
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097288 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:58:54 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097241 dadkins : That makes NO sense whatsoever!
No matter how anyone wants to spin it, BOC is an Anti-Malware, right?

Ok, so they(NSClean) used that legally to get away from the makers of NetBus from suing them... I can deal with that!
Since that is all a wash now, and MANY other scanners/residents do ALSO detect NetBus, that is a WAY tired argument, isn't it?

*I* have 5 different(probably more) apps that detect NetBus and THEY never got sued, so now what?

Someone give me a LEGIT, reason upto a month ago why BOClean didn't have a trial.

COMODO buying it and now GIVING IT AWAY FOR FREE kinda trashes that tired excuse, huh?
So, is COMODO going to get sued?
No trial - the thing is going to be FREE!

Now what?
Y'all are dodging this very weakly.
Now it doesn't matter though, does it?
It's(going to be) FREE!

So tell me again why there wasn't a trial?
Since it is going to be free now, does what you posted mean that it will be... less that what it was before?

You are raising more questions than you are answering!
Not good, is it?

I really don't care - for myself!
#1 I have it!
#2 I don't NEED it!
#3 I haven't needed it!

Now, for my friends... this is really starting to look bad.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097241 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:47:08 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097225 Name Game :
said by Mele20 See Profile :

John, many of us have already mentioned that to Dadkins and he wants to be obtuse for some reason. Look what he just said to me about the issue of BoClean never having a trial. Silly stuff that indicates he is deliberately NOT understanding. Why, I have no idea. It is not like him at all. At any rate...maybe your posting that quote for the umpteenth time here and at Wilders will finally sink in for Dadkins. So, thank you. Maybe that quote should be emblazoned on the BoClean interface. :p
He is not obtuse..he is just trying to bet me to level three. ;)
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097225 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:42:03 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097169 Mele20 : John, many of us have already mentioned that to Dadkins and he wants to be obtuse for some reason. Look what he just said to me about the issue of BoClean never having a trial. Silly stuff that indicates he is deliberately NOT understanding. Why, I have no idea. It is not like him at all. At any rate...maybe your posting that quote for the umpteenth time here and at Wilders will finally sink in for Dadkins. So, thank you. Maybe that quote should be emblazoned on the BoClean interface. :p
--
"If you want to do DRM on a PC then you need to treat the user as the enemy." Ross Anderson in "`Trusted Computing' Frequently Asked Questions"

»www.msfirefox.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097169 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:28:15 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097168 Kiwi : MSDN2_SoapServicers.

Nothing much is as safe you think.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097168 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:28:00 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097165 dadkins :
said by GoodGravyMan :

Chill already !!!!!!!!!!!
»tinyurl.com/2tajzm
:D :D :D
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097165 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:27:41 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097120 anon : Chill already !!!!!!!!!!!
»tinyurl.com/2tajzm]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097120 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:17:41 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097119 Name Game : Be careful though with that netbus thingie..Boclean just might still et it be a legit app..both ends of it..so now that you be playing with it..here is some history..

MASTER'S PARADISE INTERNET TROJAN HORSE PROGRAM
»www.privsoft.com/archive/psc-mp.html

PSC Newsletter-MEDIA DISCOVERS "SPYWARE?"

In the summer of 2000, the NETBUS trojan was sold to a Florida Corporation who decided to resell Netbus as "a legitimate remote administration tool." When they learned that BOClean was detecting the Netbus trojan as "Netbus trojan" their lawyers took action against Privacy Software Corporation, demanding a "cease and desist" on our detection of Netbus. Our corporate lawyer and our management contested the assertion, and prior to trial came to a settlement with the dealer (now defunct) which determined that BOClean would be provided with a "Do NOT detect Netbus" option in order to stop BOClean from detecting Netbus *IF* the end user so desired. A legal precedent was also set under New York jurisdiction (we're a New York Corporation legally) by this settlement which was upheld by the courts. Our "option" to NOT detect at the discretion of the end user was an "adequate remedy" under New York State law, and BOClean is governed by same.

BECAUSE we were not a "common carrier" in that there is no "evaluation copy" available to the "general public" BOClean is seen legally as a "subscriber service" and our decisions to cover or NOT cover certain malware is legally seen as a "service" rather than an obligation and thus legally, because we do NOT offer "to the general public," we are a "private club" and thus entitled to ANY discrimination "on behalf of our subscribers" as WE see fit. Netbus therefore had no legal standing to challenge our decision. AND, because we agreed in a settlement to place the "Do NOT detect Netbus" in our configuration screen, the embarassment of the "this is bad, but ignore it" display in our product only served to bury Netbus as a "legitimate remote administration tool."

The outcome is there is already legal precedent for BOCLEAN under the law, and whereas other antimalware had surrendered to bogus legal claims (but eventually relented after we won the decision) and dropped the detection of malware, BOCLEAN is under no such legal obligation. We act on behalf of our "subscribers" BECAUSE there are no "free to the general public" releases of BOClean. THAT provision is what keeps everybody safe even if it costs us "easy sales."
THE KIDDIES TURN PRO
»www.privsoft.com/archive/nws-dsc.html
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097119 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:17:35 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097066 dadkins :
said by amysheehan See Profile :

Here's how you can test BOClean:
GRC's "Leaktest"
AV's ignore it but watch BOClean.
Obviously it is not 'malware' but it has been recommended several times as a 'way' to test BOClean.

:)
Uhm, that leak test is harmless, right?
Why would avast hit on it?
Why should avast hit on it?
I know that my firewall passes it! :o

Yes! BOC did block it, but Outpost won't let it out so what was the point?
I turned off BOC for Outpost to have a whack at it! ;)

Ah well, I'll keep torturing this laptop... as I always do! LOL!
:D
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera

Can't get passed Outpost!
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097066 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:06:55 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097008 dadkins : Simple Mele, ANY other AT out there has a trial. Period.
All of them work as well as each other(not going to argue with anyone about it, I have tried them all!) :)
Now I DO have the REAL BOC! :o

No, I have not seen any good reason for BOC to not offer a trial.
Because there is no key for it?
Not my fault!
Don't care!

Because there is no verification of ownership to get updates?
Again, not my fault!
Don't care!

Ok, this is NOT meant to offend anyone, it is just my first impressions of BOC since it's install - vs what I have read about it over the years:

I *DO* have the same critter y'all do now... right?
What exactly sets BOC appart from the other ATs I have tried?
I mean, besides the no trial and no scanner things...

Malware count sure isn't it.
a2 and Ewido both has it kinda covered on overall count.

So far, albeit all of 1 hour, it has not done anything to warrant me buying it - even though it is now going to be free.

Ok, so it caught one or two "items" that got past avast/Avira/whatever. Cool!
As it should have!

What/who is to say that the same "item" would not have been caught by... Ewido if it was running resident?
How about a2?
Trojan Hunter?

Go back and read any one of a thousand posts with users saying how BOC would have kept xxxx off the syatem had the person had it running.

No offense to ANYONE, I already have several ATs that I could have running as resident.
Don't need them!


I *AM* a BOC install-ee now!
I can see for myself now, huh? ;)

*WE* SHALL SEE...

Sorry if I have come off "less than stellar" about all of this, people.
Buyouts rarely endup on the good side.
I REALLY don't want my friends to get the s***** end of the stick on this!

But, now I *CAN* see for myself.
Let it end there for now!
We will talk about this at a later date!

David
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18097008 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 22:54:31 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096992 La Luna : I can't believe everyone has their panties in a knot over this, on BOTH sides of the argument. WTF peeps? :huh:

--
~~Don't wanna' fight in a holy war...World war III when are you coming for me? Been kicking up sparks, we set the flames free...the windows are locked now so what'll it be? A house on fire or a rising sea?...~~

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096992 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 22:50:48 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096955 amysheehan : Here's how you can test BOClean:
GRC's "Leaktest"
AV's ignore it but watch BOClean.
Obviously it is not 'malware' but it has been recommended several times as a 'way' to test BOClean.

:)
--
DSLR Phishtracker]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096955 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 22:42:02 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096891 Mele20 : Avira would let the ANI trojan by it. I don't know if BoClean stops that or not but I would assume it does. Even the best AV don't catch everything immediately so I don't think it is only N....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096891 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 22:26:51 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096873 mers2 : I've seen the intrinsic value personally. Avast failed to detect a trojan in a file I had downloaded and scanned. I executed it without a peep from Avast and BoClean caught it and stopped it dead in it's tracks.

Edited to add: This was a file I executed to test Avast & BoClean
--
Team Discovery
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096873 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 22:24:05 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096866 dadkins : Ok, that's fine! :)
But, to hear the many people on here preach of how fast BOC pounces, kinda makes me wonder what was wrong with their AV choice.

Just *tried* to unzip the Trojan Simulator:
»www.misec.net/trojansimulator/
to let BOC have a shot at it in memory... got a problem though.
Avast refuses to alow me to unzip it!
Not run it, unzip it!
So, to see the intrinsic value of BOC, I have to disable my AV?
I need to tell everyone here something...
My AV gets turned off for no one.

No offense to ANYONE here or anyone anywhere, but what AV is y'all running that allows "malware" past so that BOC even sees it?

Please don't say N..... uhm, yeah.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096866 Sat, 31 Mar 2007 22:21:59 EDT Re: Comodo acquires BOClean http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18096829 Mele20 : Dadkins....I just now had a chance to read the last page of this thread and gee...why are you on such a tear? If I didn't know you, I would think you had a hidden agenda. But since I know, like and respect you...I don't know what to think!

You still haven't read my early post in this thread, I guess, that explains why BoClean could NOT offer a trial. Others explained it also so did you miss all that? You missed the same sort of comments in the Wilders thread? I also don't buy sofware if I can't trial it and I wondered, for a long time, why BoClean didn't offer a trial. That was before I found this website and I got a really inferior antitrojan software because I thought BoClean was a scam because it didn't offer a trial. Then I found this site. I learned why BoClean did not offer a trial. End of story. I thought BoClean's protection under New York law was great (once I knew about it) and I was GLAD then that BoClean had this protection and didn't offer a trial.

I really feel confounded by your continued fixation on the trial thing...I changed my attitude as soon as I read the reason for the no trial ....and I don't understand why you haven't also. Can you explain that to me? I think the loss of protection under New York law may have significant impact on BoClean and I don't have the confidence that some have that Melih will commit large sums of money to fight the scumbags that may sue now that BoClean is no longer a private club and thus no longer afforded protection under the law. To me, this is what you should be focusing on ....not continuing to complain that BoClean never offered a free trial when there was an OUTSTANDING REASON for not doing so.

Also, how about turning of Avast and then you can see what BoClean can do. BoClean is a SECONDARY DEFENSE designed to stop what your AV doesn't first stop! BoClean stops baddies from executing in memory. It doesn't stop a baddie from getting on your computer but it sure as hell will zap it if you go to execute it or it tries to execute on its own.

Anyhow...peace...I respect you a lot, I'm just puzzled by your posts in this thread.
--
"If you want to do DRM on a PC then you need to treat the user as the enemy." Ross Anderson in "`Tr