Per Wolf K:
>Every anti-malware/anti-virus program will have both false positives and 
>false negatives. No test is 100% reliable, in any context.
>
>Keep that in mind the next time your doc recommends a medical test. We 
>live in a contingent world, the best we can do is improve the odds in 
>our favour. Sometimes.

So... what to Those Who Know do?   Multiple programs, stick with one and
live with the compromises?..... if Plan B, which one?

Once I have a "Good" image to fall back to, I'm not all that worried
about day-today protection:  keep Avast up-to-date, and roll with
it....re-image if the unexpected happens.   I was just surprised that
BitDefender and MalwareBytes found stuff on my supposedly-pristine
"Good" image...  But now I've got it cleaned up and a copy squirreled
away offline.

But I've got a family member bringing their PC up here on Wednesday -
one which obviously has problems and which I could not troubleshoot via
TeamViewer.

Based on past experience - and the fact that they let their Avast
subscription expire some unknown number of weeks (months?) ago, I am
expecting it to be heaving mass of malware.

For these guys, the "Good Image" strategy is pretty much hopeless: they
spew their data all over the System drive and a re-image is going to
hurt them.

Since BitDefender returned so many more hits (65+ vs 7) on my laptop,
I'm thinking that if I apply only one, BitDefender will be it.
-- 
Pete Cresswell
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2