Better to Leave Antivirus Programs at Beginning of Malware Cleaning

Cat at play

Everybody in the world should use Avira, except those that choose not to.
:D
Sounds like the captain is in form. One might add:

You can choose any AV you like, as long as it is Avira. ;)

Btw, I am using Avira, so the joke would be on me if it wasn’t a good tool.

Perhaps the malware forum members that have to decipher the logs and advise the OP should actually have the last word on this. I figure I am unable to read the logs so I don't get a vote!
In the interests of fairness, everybody should have the last word, not just whoever happens to speak last. To make participants even happier, every one of them should in fact be allowed to have the last word several times, not just once.

Am I doing well captain? :)
 
Useful tip, but I’d like the following clarification.

Though the big splash screen is of course annoying, there is also a small pop-up above systray, which is useful because it confirms that updates are being made and informs about the number of them.

Now, does the disabling also block the above info?
 
Hmm Actually yes :( The price we pay for free I suppose ;)

Actually, no the little popup screen near the clock still works
Doh, now I have to reply
 
You can choose any AV you like, as long as it is Avira. ;)
Yeah, that's the ticket. (Say that after the style of John Lovette).
Btw, I am using Avira, so the joke would be on me if it wasn’t a good tool.
The last time I was running Avira, I got infected and had to reformat. This hasn't occurred as of yet with AVG. So, when I get infected while running AVG, I'll return to Avira. At least I'll get a different set of infections.
In the interests of fairness, everybody should have the last word, not just whoever happens to speak last. To make participants even happier, every one of them should in fact be allowed to have the last word several times, not just once.
In the state of Pennsylvania, no driver has the right of way, you may either yield it, or have it yielded to you. Accordingly, thus it goes with the last word, one may either yield it, or have it yielded to you. With this concept in "mind", I strive for "closing thoughts", that cause the thread to be locked, thereby assuring me of the last word. :rolleyes:
Am I doing well captain? :)
Priceless, a stellar performance! Supremely civil, but with claws out, as of course we might expect.

The really last word: I sincerely believe that each and every one of us has had the last word anyway. Whether it be in our perception of what we have said, or in the realm of our mind, pride, imagination, or ego! :p :rolleyes: :haha:

But wait, I'm not done yet. I feel it in my own best interest to let this situation percolate for a bit, and erstwhile I'll go download a goodly sum of photographs. That having been accomplished, I'll find a devout Christian to debate whether the forgoing photos are art or pornography, that should keep me busy for a while, with no last word in sight.

Plan "B"; Get a bowling ball. Paint a smiley face on it. Then discuss politics with it. Well, either that or Constitutional Law. Actually, the law discussion might mesh better with the protracted "rules" theme of this thread.
 
Cat at play II

The captain’s approval encourages me to have a comeback, in order to add a few last words to his last words on the last word.

The really last word: I sincerely believe that each and every one of us has had the last word anyway. Whether it be in our perception of what we have said, or in the realm of our mind, pride, imagination, or ego! :p :rolleyes: :haha:
This was actually my opinion, hence I had stopped participating in the thread subject itself and started playing with words instead. But cats notoriously like to play with threads too, so I’ll expand on the above quote in line with winding up the thread.

So it seems to me that this thread has started going round the bobbin in repetition of arguments in support of one’s opinion which no longer differs from that of the others, the problem being that people disagree that they agree. (Pun and oxymoron intended, otherwise I don’t know what I’m writing). :)

Without getting further entangled in the twists, loops and knots of the tread, I’ll just summarize that all arguments are correct in the correct circumstances, and apply where applicable, but not universally. It just depends on the particular case, which keeps shifting, and unless its parameters are precisely defined, people will see it in the colour of the eyeglasses they put on, while opinions will continue to drift closer apart.

I illustrate: Does anybody disagree with any of the following salient points established so far?

You need not remove the AV you already have, unless it needs removal. In this context, your existing AV is assumed to function satisfactorily, except when it doesn’t. As regards the appropriate time to remove it, if it’s no good, it should be removed at the outset, if it’s OK, its removal should be an option. If you’ve paid for it and replace it with a free tool, you lose your money, or maybe not, depending on the accounting principles you adopt.

It’s also important that an AV not in position to remove the malware should not be used for its removal, but should be replaced by a tool more suitable for the purpose. If however the computer won’t start or won’t be stable enough to allow replacement of the AV, such replacement should not take place.

Now, if you think that this advice of mine lacks seriousness, well, wait before you laugh at it, because whoever laughs last, laughs best. ;)

Amen! This is by definition the last word, and whatever follows it, including this sentence, should be regarded as an appendix. :D
 
there is also a small pop-up above systray, which is useful because it confirms that updates are being made and informs about the number of them.

Now, does the disabling also block the above info?
It stays :grinthumb

I edited my post up there. Sorry about that. It's because I do manual updates all the time
But the little pop-up window still comes up :)
 
Hi once again

I apologise for my late reply to my previous post .... I've been quite busy.

I will only speak with regard to a PAID FOR product as this seems to be the main issue at hand.

Bobeye :

ALL malware is NOT a virus, a Worm or a Trojan. An antivirus program is just what it's named: "antivirus"- not a spyware program, not an adware program. An antivirus program WILL tell a user they have malware if it is NOT a virus, a Worm or a Trojan, but it will NOT remove it. And extending that further: neither did it or is it capable of preventing spyware or adware

So we come to the other main malware category: spyware and adware. This malware is either prevented or found and fixed by a spyware/adware program, depending on what type of program it is. So if a user followed your assumption and carried it over to the spyware/adware malware, you would be saying that THESE programs 'have let them down'

http://www.kaspersky.com/kaspersky_anti-virus .... Kapersky premium http://www.eset.co.za/products/nod32.php .... ESET premium
http://www.symantec.com/norton360/about/index.jsp .... Norton 360 premium http://www.avira.com/en/products/avira_premium_security_suite.html .... Avira premium
http://www.avast.com/ .... Avast premium

I mention the above 5 as they are the most common AVs used (If my failure to mention any other AV has offended anyone, I apologise - I'm sure my following argument will satisfy the left out ones too) ....

Based on the above quote, I wish to make you see that what is advertised by the individual AV sites is contradictory to what you have stated. What is advertised to the customer is that the premium product WILL in fact either PROTECT you or DEFEND you against viruses, malware, adware and spyware. Do they mean that the anti-VIRUS will then "TELL" you that you have been infected either by malware, adware or spyware (everything excluding "virus") and then just leave your pc as is because the anti-VIRUS cannot do anything about it?? I think NOT. Each of the above mentioned sites specifically states that their product is capable of protecting your system from any type of threat. Therefore, if a user requires support due to an infection incurred when a product is already installed on their system, the installed product has unquestionably failed to do its job! (again a 180 from what you have stated).

The failed product should thus be completely removed (using a removal tool) so that it cannot assist in further corruption of the system. As I've stated in my previous post and something that treetops eludes to as well in stating the following

If anything 2 eyes are better then one, recommending a op uninstalls there current av and installs avira itself is giving them 2 scans from 2 unique scanners instead of one. Of course after they are done cleaning up they can choose to reinstall there old av and uninstall avira. It also gives them a chance to taste another product, some users have only tried 1 product
,

another product should be installed (i.e. one of our recommended free AVs on the 8-step) so that a STANDARDIZED approach to cleaning is done!

This by Bobcat:

You need not remove the AV you already have, unless it needs removal. In this context, your existing AV is assumed to function satisfactorily, except when it doesn’t. As regards the appropriate time to remove it, if it’s no good, it should be removed at the outset, if it’s OK, its removal should be an option. If you’ve paid for it and replace it with a free tool, you lose your money, or maybe not, depending on the accounting principles you adopt

I do NOT agree as there are too many "ifs" in your recommendation. If updating is not possible, if the product is not working, if it's paid for or not and if they in fact lose their money - ALL are irrelevant. The user requiring support only requires his/her pc to be cleaned of the infection. We should not be asking "if" but merely be stating what should be done. The user has come to us for help - why are we asking for his/her opinion on what product he/she has or which one he/she prefers? This will speed up the entire cleaning process; we are working in different time zones and different countries - enquiring whether the product is in fact working or not is just wasting more time and possibly creating more panic for the user at hand. Remove the installed product (even if it is one of our recommended ones - in which case the alternative should be installed) and complete the rest of the 8-step tool (which would mean install one of the recommended AVs) should be what we tell our users.

Bobeye:

Your initial post stated that the user should be given a recommendation of what AV to install AFTER cleaning has been completed. This is my biggest disagreement. Whether or not the user decides to revert back to their product AFTER cleaning, is what should be THEIR choice. It should be OUR choice as to what AV they should have installed BEFORE cleaning - thus, in my humble opinion, the term recommended in the 8-step tool should be changed to compulsory for the duration of the cleaning process.

Spyder_1386 :)
 
Good argument :grinthumb

But I confirm that Bobbye agreed that you need multiple programs to remove Malware (generally)

But if you are going to the other extreme, ie force change (opposite of don't suggest it)
Then we could get to an equal compromise of state as a (strong) suggestion in the first place. ie What I had been doing all along.

If the member disagrees with the suggestion, no problems, but they may need to do an online AntiVirus scan as well ;) (with a better product !)
 
But I confirm that Bobbye agreed that you need multiple programs to remove Malware (generally)

I completely understand this fact. This is, however, NOT what the advertising on the premium products state. They specifically state that their product is capable of Protecting (which invariably translates to "removing on infection") the customer's computer - which it is clearly NOT able to do (and thus further products are needed to assist in cleaning - these are recommended products on the 8-step tool as well and should also be made compulsory for the duration of the clean).

Again, all in my humble opinion - I'm but trying to make the cleaning process more efficient, and this is in my view, the best way of doing so.

EDIT:
If the member disagrees with the suggestion, no problems

Why is this not a problem if i may ask? Users are coming to us for help and then still have a say in how we should help them and are allowed to disagree with our methods? This does not sound right to me lol.

Spyder_1386 :)
 
Last word

If you believe you have the last word, you do. The only reality that exists, is the one in ones own mind(aside from real reality). Knowing this, one way to get the last word is to simply reply and never look at the thread again :).
 
I agree and disagree with all of you- at some point! :confused:

It's been an interesting trip!
 
If you believe you have the last word, you do. The only reality that exists, is the one in ones own mind(aside from real reality). Knowing this, one way to get the last word is to simply reply and never look at the thread again :).

Dude;
The really last word: I sincerely believe that each and every one of us has had the last word anyway. Whether it be in our perception of what we have said, or in the realm of our mind, pride, imagination, or ego! :p :rolleyes: :haha:

I'm quoting myself here, from further up the page. I suppose that paraphrasing is a valid form of artistic expression though. :rolleyes:
 
seeing my handle will likely cause anticipation of my comment:

The teacher should (imo) make recommendations rather than mandates,
even when the O.P. has clearly no understanding and has an inferior product installed.​

History on TS has shown that P2P is dangerous, running daily on an Admin login is
suicide, and that products wax and wane in their efficacy. Making rules on this or that
just turns people off and they lose interest in our replies.

Wish Teddy Roosevelt were a member:
Walk softly and carry a big stick
 
Compelling Arguments All..............

This thread has made this best and most persuasive argument for reformatting and reinstalling Windows I have yet to encounter.
Man up Buckos, and jamb your Windows disc where it will do either the most good, or bring the most joy.

To begin recovery, Press F-11
 
Ok I was going to quote a few members text, but there were just too many to quote!

We need to finalize exactly what is acceptable by support :rolleyes:


@Bobbye; CAMusing: Guess what? We reached "a wider audience" presently an increasing 400+ unique member visits (note a re-visit does not increase the counter, even if you clear all the cookies)

@bobcat; kritius; mopar man; treetops (with varied inputs of Yes/No recommendation to uninstall or install Antivirus software) Hence the thread

@captaincranky, suggestion to Restore: Not in line with this thread

@Spyder_1386, suggestion for mandatory 8-Step process applications, one word: Denied. (but it was good for a moment)

@jobeard, cleared up the words "Suggestion" and "No" and "Yes", with the word: "teacher recommendations" (meaning Qualified support recommendations)


As for me, I agree with jobeard, ie my point exactly.


So looking at the 8-Step Guide
PLEASE DO NOT USE THIS GUIDE AS A ONE-STOP-FIX-ALL.
It only serves to help you produce some logs for us so we can see if your system needs further attention and cleaning.
A help "Guide", that only serves to attach the logs
So support can provide possibly further cleaning

The rule states that we must be able to read the logs, to provide this "further cleaning" process, actually here's that rule:
mandatory to be knowledgeable in this area and adhere to these guidelines by following the log scan process and offer help based on the 8-step instructions first.
"based on the 8-step instructions first." :rolleyes:

The way I see it is: I can "offer" recommendation to install Avira, whilst providing "mandatory knowledge" checking the logs. At any stage throughout the thread



Are we all agreed ? Any Questions ?
 
But kimsland, you are telling people, partly by PM, that if they see AVG in any logs to tell the user to remove it. It is NOT coming over as a recommendation.
 
Back