Broadband Tech > Security > Security > Which is "safest" file format to receive documents in?

reply to jaykaykay

Re: Which is "safest" file format to receive documents

It's hell to be a dinosaur, isn't it!

reply to StuartMW

reply to StuartMW

Have you ever required the special dialing-wand?

reply to jaykaykay

Some of us is cuter than others!

»images.sodahead.com/polls/000700···rge.jpeg

reply to StuartMW

Good luck at requesting or even expecting the people you email with to follow a certain protocol to send you email. Just let your security software do it's job and let it ride. If he has Avast on there and it's the latest version without any issues, there will be no issues. Anything else is out of his/her control.

Don't you know it is SCAM to let your AV scan your email? Further, most ISPs provide email scanning both incoming and outgoing so why would you do it twice?

You only need to scan an individual email if it has an attachment. You should turn off automatic email scanning in your AV and simply manually scan attachments if you feel the need for a second opinion. My ISP uses Symantec corporate version. Not much gets by it. (It's superior to Norton). I also have a dslr email account which used to have AV scanning. I get a lot of garbage in that account (none in my ISP accounts) so I just delete all of it unopened.

The problem with throwing up your hands and claiming that expecting others to use proper internet protocol regarding email is that your attitude leads to utter chaos, massive invasion of your privacy, and rewards the assholes who can't be bothered to learn how to be polite when communicating via email.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson

Mele20,
The malware that can be nested in pdfs and other file types cannot be detected by signature-based AVs until they execute.
But it is not a scam to scan files wherever they come from.

Huh? Of course, my AV (Avira) can detect malware in PDF by right click on demand scan of the PDF file in question! Further, I refuse to use an AV that does not allow me to configure it properly (which is SCAN ALL FILES BOTH WITH ON DEMAND AND ON ACCESS ENGINES and to scan archives at a high depth even if that slows things). I won't use an AV that restricts scanning to certain file types only or makes any other restrictions (usually for the sake of being faster).

But it doesn't really matter. If I was a sloppy user who couldn't be bothered to first download the PDF and then do a manual scan of it using Luke Filewalker (Avira on demand scanner), Guard (Avira real time scanner) would still catch it as it tried to execute. Actually, ProcessGuard would catch it first in that scenario.

If Avira does not have a signature or its heuristics can't detect it either then ProcessGuard will stop it.

Microsoft states that antivirus scanning should be turned OFF for Outlook Express. That is the email client I use. I have NEVER had AV turned on for email. But I have an enlightened ISP that scans all incoming and outgoing mail at the main email gateways long before it gets to my email box on OE. But before my ISP started scanning all email, I did not allow my AV (I've had a variety of them) to scan my emails. I practice safe hex as everyone should. I download ALL email attachments to disk before opening. Once downloaded, I scan them with my AV. If I am still suspicious, then I right click on the downloaded attachment and choose "Send" from the context menu and then click on "VirusTotal" and with the VirusTotal free program I have that is all it takes to send the file to VT for scanning by a huge number of AV.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson

If I had to deal with all that every time I click or wanted to view a page or a pdf..might as well pack it all in and pull the plug..so I take out my trusty google chrome and let it do the deed and never worry about infecting that fragile Microsoft OS from the likes of Bertha Kuhn .

Yes, but you don't care about privacy. I do.

reply to Name Game

reply to Name Game

reply to Name Game
Shrug. Sigh. Google knows about a HANDLE. That's all. Plus, I use more than one handle.

Now your situation using Chrome is FAR MORE SERIOUS as to loss of privacy.

Don't kid yourself like you are doing. You like Chrome so you make a ton of excuses about how your privacy is not invaded and even resort to red herrings. I am really surprised that you have convinced yourself of this so you can continue using Chrome. What happened to you?

sounds kinky.

Ooooh!

Surely you jest though.

reply to jaykaykay