<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Add another one to the list of basic security apps you should be running, AVG&#8217;s Anti-rootkit Free</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.techspot.com/blog/75/add-another-one-to-the-basic-security-apps-you-should-be-running-in-windows/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.techspot.com/blog/75/add-another-one-to-the-basic-security-apps-you-should-be-running-in-windows/</link>
	<description>Technology news and commentary by the TechSpot.com staff</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:41:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: howard_hopkinso</title>
		<link>http://www.techspot.com/blog/75/add-another-one-to-the-basic-security-apps-you-should-be-running-in-windows/#comment-6137</link>
		<dc:creator>howard_hopkinso</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 05:29:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techspot.com/blog/75/add-another-one-to-the-basic-security-apps-you-should-be-running-in-windows/#comment-6137</guid>
		<description>pandasecurity.comAVG Antirootkit is ok, but it does tend to throw up quite a lot of false positives from time to time. Also, it`s detection rates aren`t that good.

I actually prefer and recommend the Panda antirootkit programme.

http://www.pandasecurity.com/homeusers/downloads/docs/product/help/rkc/en/rkc_en.htm?

It`s detection rates are better than AVG and it doesn`t seem to suffer from as many false positives. It`s updatable just like an AV programme and will automatically fix known rootkit infections. Unknown suspected rootkits are reported but not fixed unless the user selects the unknown files to be fixed. This is very handy and gives the user time to get advice on whether the unknown files should be removed or not. The programme even allows the user to upload unknown files for analysis. The only downside thus far, is Panda Antirootkit is not compatible with Windows Vista.

Regards Howard :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>pandasecurity.comAVG Antirootkit is ok, but it does tend to throw up quite a lot of false positives from time to time. Also, it`s detection rates aren`t that good.</p>
<p>I actually prefer and recommend the Panda antirootkit programme.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.pandasecurity.com/homeusers/downloads/docs/product/help/rkc/en/rkc_en.htm?" rel="nofollow">http://www.pandasecurity.com/homeusers/downloads/docs/product/help/rkc/en/rkc_en.htm?</a></p>
<p>It`s detection rates are better than AVG and it doesn`t seem to suffer from as many false positives. It`s updatable just like an AV programme and will automatically fix known rootkit infections. Unknown suspected rootkits are reported but not fixed unless the user selects the unknown files to be fixed. This is very handy and gives the user time to get advice on whether the unknown files should be removed or not. The programme even allows the user to upload unknown files for analysis. The only downside thus far, is Panda Antirootkit is not compatible with Windows Vista.</p>
<p>Regards Howard :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julio</title>
		<link>http://www.techspot.com/blog/75/add-another-one-to-the-basic-security-apps-you-should-be-running-in-windows/#comment-5416</link>
		<dc:creator>Julio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 03:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techspot.com/blog/75/add-another-one-to-the-basic-security-apps-you-should-be-running-in-windows/#comment-5416</guid>
		<description>Anything wrong you see with the program? I mean, it's free and seems to work just fine although your mileage will vary with these kind of malware exploits, there is always new stuff coming out.

In the other hand, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of free utilities to help with that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anything wrong you see with the program? I mean, it&#8217;s free and seems to work just fine although your mileage will vary with these kind of malware exploits, there is always new stuff coming out.</p>
<p>In the other hand, there doesn&#8217;t seem to be a whole lot of free utilities to help with that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
