"p-0''0-h the cat (ES)"  wrote in
news:ohi04ahipv8o3gdmj9l5rbvh6bntdbahtk@4ax.com: 

> On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 22:00:44 +0000 (UTC), Dustin
>  wrote:
> 
>>"p-0''0-h the cat (ES)"  wrote
>>in news:9ma04alrff3i65armitb8emu4f0373eotv@4ax.com: 
>>
>>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 17:48:33 +0000 (UTC), Dustin
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>>>"p-0''0-h the cat (ES)"  wrote
>>>>in news:u3jv3a5dp44l10cblfjvv1ta8k84a1leml@4ax.com: 
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 13:37:21 +0000, Charles Lindbergh
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 15:29:07 +0200 (CEST), "Anonymous Remailer
>>>>>>(austria)"  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In article 
>>>>>>>~BD~  wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does anyone here use this?
>>>>>>>> http://www.brightfort.com/spywareblaster.html 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If so, is it considered to be as good as/better than/worse
>>>>>>>> than Malwarebytes?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It was 'recommended' to me way back, in post 3 on this
>>>>>>>> forum: 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.spywareinfoforum.com/topic/58733-adware-away/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> D.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>They are not similar programs by any means.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I've used spywareblaster for some years. It stays out of the
>>>>>>>way and doesn't screw up the machine, and that's more than I
>>>>>>>can say for the resource hog malwarebytes. I had the paid
>>>>>>>version of the latter and it slowed my machine. It also
>>>>>>>didn't behave nice with certain other programs. It never
>>>>>>>caught anything in the year or more I ran it. I dumped it.
>>>>>>>The great reviews you read here about it are from an ignorant
>>>>>>>malwarebytes fan club. I use only the Win XP firewall and a
>>>>>>>paid AV. I haven't had an infection in so many years I can
>>>>>>>hardly remember when that was. Almost all this "defensive"
>>>>>>>crap, including software firewalls, are little more than
>>>>>>>amusement for bored users who have to be kept supplied with 
>>>>>>>new toys. (Let the games now begin - but first, give me a few
>>>>>>>moments to get the cotton in my ears.) 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>But, could you turn loose on your machine, for 3 hours, a 13
>>>>>>year old grandchild (unsupervised) and have it remain so
>>>>>>pristine? 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Just giving them a separate account without administrator
>>>>> privileges will solve 99% of the problem. 
>>>>
>>>>No, it won't. :) Clearly you prefer to deny the fact that rights
>>>>escalation malware does exist and he's using windows XP. [g] 
>>> 
>>> You're talking bollocks Dusty. There is less rights escalation
>>> malware written for XP because so many people run with admin
>>> rights anyway and there is no UAC to contend with. 
>>
>>I'm not talking bollocks in the least little bit. UAC is a joke,
>>an annoying one, but still, a joke...
>>
>> 
>>> Privilege escalation is rare and difficult to achieve. That's
>>> what the 1% is for :) 
> 
>>You're mistaken, as usual.
> 
> So privilege escalation isn't rare then? and it's easy to achieve?
> What percentage of malware written for XP do you contend uses it?
> 
>>> Added alt.comp.anti-virus
>>
>>I have no problem with this. Maybe when you read the same
>>information from others, it'll sink in. 

Pooh Cat I reckon that crazy message wasn't from Dustin but from a 
member of his family who found his machine unattended. Just saying.

-- 
Jax        
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2