rhythmnsmoke

I know things may go a little off balance sometimes, however the no reply from your sales people isn't a good starting point for any company.I am after costings for all ImmunEngine products, from both single user standalone to networked multiple seats. These will run on a variety of systems running all flavours of NT based OSes. The seat numbers could range from 1 up to 1200 and will likely require more than one product due to multiple servers. This all depends upon the costings and our respective future upgrade strategy. Without costings for all possible scenarios, I will be unable to draft a proposal of any type. I am quite happy to receive the costings initially through this thread, they need not be exact figures simply estimated 'ball park' figures for each specific range of seat numbers. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You need to PM me, as I am in direct contact with the primary sales guy. I will make him aware of your inquiry. As I said though, you need to PM me. I need specific info, such as the organization in question, your position within the organization (if you are not the person to make such decisions, then I will need the contact info. of the person that is), etc... From a technical standpoint, it would be helpful to also include information on how the organization opperates...ie if you use enterprise wide solutions like Tivoli, SMS; How you have your administrators structured, etc..

Can you seriously be sued for leaving your job? I was on The Inquirer and came upon this.

My bad. I'm not use to so many thread sections.

PM me with what you are requesting. ie...#number of machines. Now that is an honest answer. But, just because you can't have it right now, doesn't make it a waste of time. I go to the mall to window shop even if I don't have money, but wouldn't consider it a waste of time, IMO. I'm sure this technology will eventually fall into your hands. Have a good one.

I was watching Fox News yesterday, and caught a breif 2min clip of them talking about Microsoft's new approach to securing copies of Windows XP. I think it mentioned that they will no longer require you to put in the authentication code, but some way or another they are checking the actual hard drive. Does anyone know any more about this?

That's just weird...it should run without any configuration changes right after installation. Somethings got to be blocking it. Unless you made some incorrect setting during install.

Sweet. But do you know of anyone on here with a carputer too? I think the idea of being able to play DVD's in a computer in my car, is 10 times better(not to mention cheaper) than buying one of those flip screen DVD players.

Yes sir!.Did you listen other guys suggestion about stop bulls***ing and using this place as your advertisement channel?Why should anybody do what you say?C'mon I expect better than this from you. You cant even stand for some simple critiques.You are promoting "mighty" dress which is seen only by genius.You cant reply simple critiques instead you are doing again lenghty posts.Can all this people be wrong?,according to your genious logic.It is really funny to read your posts.You are naked spam queen. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was merely trying to tell you, that if you feel as though I am wasting your time, then you don't have to make any further comments or indulge anything I say. I'm not forcing you to make comments, and I'm not forcing you to attend the meeting. But if you are going to continue to reply, then why not set aside some of that time to attend the meeting? Did you not listen to what I said about this wasn't a means of advertising? WHY on earth would you use a message board as an advertising channel, when there will be no value out of it? Wouldn't that be a waste of time? Obviously, therefore this is not and by no means a channel for advertisement. I haven't read a "simple" critique as you stated. All I have read were insults and false claims without proper backing. And I do believe that I have not left a question unanswered thus far. If I have, then please post it again. If you were any bit of a open minded person, you wouldn't stoop to the level of "name calling". And "Truth" is not always crystal clear, when you have someone that has been told that this is "the way and the only way" throught their entire educational training and knowledge. The "Set in their Ways" phrase would not exist it that was the case.

I was wondering if anyone here has a carputer? I think my next PC should be a MiniATX. I want to be able to have a slim DVD-RW drive that's pretty good, but not to expensive. The heat here has been about 98+ degrees lately, so the mobo has to be running a fanless processor. What are you guys setups?

What would help to narrow things down a bit, is if you can recall what exactly took place the last time you successfully used firefox to surf the web. And have you tried upgrading the browser as well. And what firewall do you have?

Then simply stop following the thread and stop posting. I have, and continue to do so. Don't try to pass off your stubborn attitudes onto me, and make claims that I haven't taken you as far as I can. THIS IS WHERE THE ROAD ENDS! If you wish to have a time bombed version, then talk to someone that's involved with sales. Do you understand the concept, that I can't make all the decisions? I don't know how many times I have to say it. If you may do so, just copy and paste my statements to where I said "Hey, you should buy this", or "Hey, I'm the best programmer in the world, and know one tops ME!". I would so love for you to copy and paste that again for me. Just to show that I'm making these claims. You won't find any. Do you want to know why? Because I Never Said It....geesh. Infact I even stated that I WASN'T the expert. Infact I stated that I was just like everyone else here. INFACT, I stated that I was only trying to convey what I understand and know, from our CP, by listening and watching him explain things. INFACT, I even stated that I wasn't a programmer. So, please don't put words into my mouth sir. I can care less if you tell your boss that you saw a live meeting and it looked impressive. Because it won't be us that's soliciting the software to whom ever, it's the other compaines that wisper into other compaines ears. Then that company decides to take a look at it.

Listen man....I'm not trying to sell it to you, or make you buy it. So, there is absolutely no harm done in you just attending the meeting. You say a it can be faked over the web. If you were to watch it, and then have a doubt that I could have faked it, then fine. But you can't just simply stand on the ground and say just because it's possible, I must be doing it. That is not justifiable evidence to come to the conclusion that you wouldn't attend the meeting. Seeing something in "Real" time happening before your face has a lot more credit to it than that. Like I said, you don't loose anything by seeing it run. I'm not saying that you are claiming that it didn't work. All I'm saying is you have no reason to attend the meeting. I am just curious and would just like to throw this question out to you...Exactly how many Live Meetings (Not NetMeeting) sessions have you attended? Just for a little research on what Live Meeting can be used for, is for online schooling. When you attend it, it's just as if your sitting there next to me looking at the same screen I'm looking at. *Edit* Did you just blindly download the NOD32 after your friend sparked your interest? Or did you do your research and find out what it did, before you began your install? I assume you did your research first. So, look at attending the meeting as another part of doing the research, before just blindly installing the software. What are you talking about? I never claimed that everyone else was stupid. For the most part everyone else has been telling me that I'm stupid. And what explanations are you claiming to be just "excuses". 1) We DON'T have a stripped down demo version that we let anyone have. Therefore, the only thing you would be able to get would be a full-production version of the software(and who in their right minds give away full-production version to any and everyone that ask). 2) I DON'T have the power to tell anyone to strip it down, just so I can give you a copy. 3) I DON'T have the power to pick and choose who gets a free copy. 4) It's only a matter of time till we make it to that point that there will be a stripped down(time bombed) version. The point is, I Can't Give You Something I Don't Have. You ask for a time bomb version. We DON'T have one. And again, no one is going to give you a full copy of any production software that you can install, and not have the ability to make you uninstall it from your machine in a specified time frame....plain and simple. Let me guess, I'm suppose to just trust you right? Like the same trust your showing me...right? Like I said, I got two more people lined up to attend the meeting. If you do not wish to come, then don't. If you claim it's not worth the time out of your day to just sit down a few minutes and attend the meeting, then why is it worth HOURS of your time a day to come and post flaming comments? I have sparked your interest enough that you take HOURS out of your day and feel free to flame me, but I haven't sparked your interest enough for you to take 30 mins and sit back and enoy the meeting....is that what you are telling me? I have not once tried to say anyone is stupid, dumb, idiotic, nor have I claimed to be the super "know it all". If anything I consider to be stupid, then it's your "closed mindedness". Don't be afraid to thin out of the box for a change.

No, the original point is, few of you are to stubborn to take me up on my offer. The saying "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" is pretty much what I'm up against. I have already explained about the specifics in sending out free copies.

So, now I'm faking it again. I'm going through the trouble of creating a program just to fool people and make them believe...COME ON MAN! Let me guess, I faked it authorizing/scanning everything that I touched too. I must have faked the executables that were running in the Task Manager as well. I must have faked executing a program from it's location (to which it ran), then moving it to another part of the system and trying to execute it (to which it didn't ran) and it get eradicated. I also must have faked the forensic data that gets passed back to the admin console. Not to mention, this is happening all in "Real Time". Then to that Sir, I must be one heck of a magician. Not even David Copperfield could pull this one off. What are you talking about? I never stated that I was the Co-CEO, nor did I ever state that I was a Jr. Programmer for the team....Dude, please..please read the post. I am the Jr. Network Engineer again for the umpteenth time. Gosh man, if you are going to keep making comments without actually reading what I wrote, then why should I insist on replying to you. Why do you insist on trying to rough my feathers. I just merely posted some terminology and accounts to what I was saying. I'm not trying to be hostile towards you and wish to remain professional on all levels. But, if it makes you feel better to insult me, then to contribute a comment of any value to this thread, then I do not wish to reply to any more of your comments. Save the space for someone who dosen't come off so childish. PS...I still haven't forgotten the fact that you haven't answered a single one of my questions. Nor have you replied to my PM. Why is that? I'm not trying to blow smoke up your butt. I already assured you that I wouldn't be wasting your time if you attended the meeting. Yet, despite the time you had to create this post, you couldn't have taken the time to answer me. And what reasons do you have to not come to the meeting? It's not like I'm stealing something from you, or trying to convience you to buy anything. So, there is no very "valuable" reason NOT to attend the meeting. Didn't Sony have to start somewhere as a company? They didn't just burst onto the scene and people automatically trusted them. So, you got to start somewhere my friend. Then why don't you be the judge for yourself to see if it's fake or not? There was a time when people told Christopher Columbus that they knew the world was flat. But did it stop them from proving that it was round? Wonder how much skeptisim Armstrong recieved for thinking that he would be able to land on the moon? This is still not a good reason to not come to the meeting. You have nothing to loose, but only knowledge to gain. How can you argue with that statement? The meeting session doesn't even require you to download any software to your machine. Again, there is no valuable answer to NOT come to the meeting. I answer all you questions at the time of the meeting, I even make the long distance phone calls on my cell to you. There is absolutely NOTHING you have to loose by watching, except the fact that it works like I say it does, and that you actually learned something that was thought to not be possible, really is. I'm more or less trying to get people to prove to me that it DOSEN'T work. If you can attend the meeting and come back and TRULY say that it was all a hoax, then by all means do so. But don't cry "Foul Play" on something you didn't even take 30 mins of your time to check out. If it's a load of BS, then by all means tell everyone you know, and have the moderators close this thread. But you see, the problem is not on my side of the fence, it's on your side. No one will do that. If you hate to read my so-called "BS" then get it over with already, and just attend the meeting to prove me wrong and tell everyone else that I've had one to many shots to the head. But if you can't do that, or not interested in doing that, then don't try to say that it dosen't work. The manner that I give the presentation in (despite the 1,000's of miles apart and the hardware), is no different than if I was standing right in front of you. You just have to see it for yourself. So, why don't you NOT take my word for it, and just come to the meeting and then post how I'm full of it. Then I would be SOOOO...happy and ready to throw in the gloves and call you victorious. Because, I would rather reply to post of people seeking answers in how it works, rather than spending my time trying to throw stones back and forth with someone who claims it dosen't work and can't prove it. I'm trying to PROVE myself, that's the point. But if you don't allow me the opportunity to do that, then it's not my fault. And the only solution to the problem is for me to give you a free copy...to which I have already been through that and explained the complications along with that. Ironically, that has nothing to do with the fact of being tech-savvy. I have been a senior member of VVTI.Net since 2000. Despite my longevity their and countless post, when I started working for BBX Technologies, and made one post of how and what we do, I was still meet with the same "You Can't Do That With Microsoft" attitudes. If Mcafee, Symantec, Tred Micro, and other countless signature up-dated software is all you know and someone has told you there is nothing more for years and years, then of course you are going to throw up the BS flag on a small company like BBX saying we got something new. And you don't have to be tech-savvy to say that. Throwing up the BS flag from the start is natural, because you have years of experience and know-how of that this is the "way" and non-other is better. But to continue to throw up the BS flag after the fact that I offered to show it to you but you not take me up on it, is just not justifiable and dosen't make sense. I only wish that you can be fair and just in it all. And at this point, that has not been the route gone. The only reason I can come up with as an explanation for the lack of professionalism coming from certain members is their ego is to big for their own good. Therefore, I'm more or less slandered and insulted and told that I'm full of it(without backing to make such a statement I might add). All I ask is that you slander me AFTER you come to the meeting. Insult me AFTER you come to the meeting. I have 100%, without a doubt that you will not call me a liar, so I can make such a bold statement. By the way, I have two more people willing to participate. So, when the meeting is over with, they may also give me some credibility. The only one so far that has taken time to say that I'm not full of it is Dman. To which he has been insulted by insinuating that he dosen't know something when he see's it. And that he must have been gullable and easily manipulated. So, Thanks Dman, for trying. I think two more people on our side should help the cause out some. Thanks for trying to lighten the load I'm recieving and taken some of the heat. If you want, I'm giving another demo Friday 7/29 after work, if you would like to see it again, just e-mail or PM me again.

I can see where if you just glanced over it, you would make that mistake. But if you looked at it good enough, and know what to look for with CG graphics, you can pick them out real easy. Personally, I'm a big movie buff, so I seen a lot of films and have been able to figure out to some degree when the CG takes hold of the graphics. I understand that, but in the meeting, you will be able to see that this isn't just a mere smoking mirror. It's on the same level as when you see a News Anchor man talking to another News reporter live on TV. There is always an audio and sometimes a video delay, but it's still live and not pre-recorded. That's the same as you attending the meeting. Except you will only experience at times video delay. Otherwise, it's pretty neat. That must have been real nice. Wish I had those connections. But as you know, the Home Use version is still dated 9/7/2004. So, it would make more sense to apply a trial version to an updated version of our Home Use. So, until that happens, count the days. Whatever time is acceptable to you, or any other individuals, I will do my best to get around to you. I am trying to schedule the meetings according to my time and the time of as many people that can attend. Kind of hard to do when your half way accross the globe. But I will do them on an individual basis too. Also for everyone else, I will find some machines to take home on the weekend, and setup a meeting for those people who can't make it at the times I post. I don't know if you saw it, but someone flamed me because I keep re-answering the questions directly with another post instead of editing my previous post. Therefore, I'm trying to both answer and edit, and at this point it's hard for you to find the specific answer to your question by going back through the pages. So, it's either I re-direct you to re-read the post, or just answer the question again. And I've taken it upon myself to re-answer you instead of making you go back through all these pages. I'm not trying to make an excuse for my lack thereof in the other threads. But after I make one post in this thread, I get about 5+ post back. And then I have to answer all the questions, read other e-mail I have from other misc. forums like VVTI.net and VVT-I.net, and also be able to do my work. It's a little hard. But I promise, this not going to be my only contribution to MSFN If I was suffering from the same back pain, then I would be at least be curious to know what the heck they did for the guy. And would seek answers, instead of just flat out saying it's a hoax. If it turns out to work, fine. If it's a hoax, fine. The only thing I lost in the process was my time was wasted. I didn't loose any money out of it all. If it was a hoax, then I would put the word out to people to not waste their money. But the POINT is I wouldn't warn anyone until AFTER I got my answers. I don't know how many of you actually saw the whole conference for the PS3 when it hits. They showed all the graphics and talked a lot of technical jargon concerning the Cell Processor that's suppose to be in it. Well, look of it that way. PS3 isn't scheduled to come out till next year. But does that stop Sony from telling you how cool it's going to be? NO. Or stop them from demonstrating the new graphics that Nvidia has been able to come up with? NO. Can you have a PS3 to test out right now? NOT YET! All I'm saying guys is, It's Coming.

Maybe when we get to that point, I will run it by him to see if that's something we can put in for you. What I'm saying, as of RIGHT NOW, we don't have some watered down trial version that anyone can have. We are not in that stage of distribution. 1) Anyone can look at that and tell it's not real. 2) You are comparing a "Static" picture to "Listening to a persons voice, and watching them move stuff around on the desktop of their computer live as they describe what you are seeing". That's not the same thing. 3) When you are at the track and seeing them for yourself in real life and in person, are you actually DRIVING the cars. If not, then coming to the meeting is on the same level of experience as that, except it's done with a computer through your monitor. How is me describing how it works, being "negative"? 1) We don't have the funds to try and buy someone to say it works. 2) Those people who are claiming that is far fetched are making statements without even seeing it run. 3) The people who did get to see it, and came back to post, I didn't pay them to say what I wanted them to say either. How do you explain and answer my 3rd point? The only answer you could give to that is, "I must have fooled them somehow, and they don't know what they were looking at." That's exactly what happened. And that is what I meant by they shoot down anyone that comes back and says "yeah it does work". Frankly, that's not good enough justification in my book to write them off. You say that there are holes, but you don't provide examples, nor do you seek for me to clarify them. Please if you mis-understood something, I would be more than happy to clear that up for you. Then explain exactly what people you were talking about in that part of your comment. You mean to tell me that you don't make the assumption that these people are not "APT" as you put it with computers. Because I have shown people from this board, to which they have come back to say it does work, only for you to tell them that they were not "APT" in computers. So, please, clarify this. And if they are not "APT" as you say they are, then where are all the "APT" people who can post comments AFTER they attend the meeting to tell you that it works. Those very same people that are knowledgeable are also the same people I was talking about their ego's. Those are the same people that try to pass judgement without actually attending the meeting. Don't you think that this thread would end and I would stop posting if someone to whom you considered to be "APT" actually attended the meeting and came back and said NO it dosen't work? This thread would then be killed. Has anyone that you deemed "APT" take me up on the challenge. NO. Therefore the thread moves on. So, show me all the people that have heavy background in computers, and I will personally invite them to the meeting. If they don't accept, then you can't blame the fact that only people you consider to only have "USER" knowledge only came to the meeting, on me. If I was to spell everything out, then you would accuse me of assuming you don't know anything about it. Through your personal attack against me, you have failed to provide the good people on this board with an answer to my specific questions. And yes, Microsoft does recognize those as part of the C++ standards, and will accept them as code. Taken from ATLSTL Taken from Definition page ATL programming...guess I must have made that up. And again, you have not answered my question. How many applications, code have you created that contains ATL, WTL and STL? Taken from Wikipedia It states right there, that there are few programmers that actually do it, because of the lack of documentation. How many times do I have to say that I'm not the programmer. Nor do I program, and that all my knowledge is coming from a guy that has spent 10+ years coding this solution? You are truly showing your character. Now your saying that anyone in their right mind was able to actually see the proof, that they still wouldn't believe me. Man, that's a hard cookie. Now your insulting me directly....Geesh, I'm only trying to be professional with you here. Why would I steal code I don't understand. Again, "I AM NOT THE CODER, NOR DO I CODE". Did you not read the post telling you not to make sarcastic statements claiming I'm saying that I'm a coding "GOD". Obviously you didn't, because that is just what you did right there. I told you that I'm only conveying my knowledge and understanding, and trying to interpret what I hear from the man himself. And when he tells me what the source code consist of, and then I tell you that some of the code contains ATL, WTL, and STL, and you tell me that you can't code using that. All I did was ask, how do you know, when you don't even code using that stuff. To which all you can come back with is to say that I'm full of it. That's not answering my question...so stop Beating Around the Bush. All the people need is a YES or NO answer. So, how many applications have you created that extended the shell of the Microsoft OS? And exactly what would I need help with? AGAIN, I'M NOT THE CODER! Geesh man....Do you not understand anything I tell you. It's like it goes in one ear and out the other. 1) I'm NOT the coder. 2) If there is something you would like for me to clarify, I would get the answer for you. 3) You are the first person who sounds as if you are angry about something. I don't recall insulting directly, if so, then I apologize. All I wanted is for you to answer those questions in specific. 4) Why don't you take me up on the offer if you are so sure it dosen't work and I'm just blowing smoke. If you attend the meeting, and I show you and you can prove to everyone else that it didn't do what I said it did (without lieing to them), then they can close this Thread and I won't post anymore. I have asked countless times for you all to take a vote and conisder someone who you think has a high level of knowledge of programming to speak on your behalf. And I would demo to that person, and show them everything in running, and they could come back and post their comments. Has that vote been done? NO. I have so many times described that I'm just like everyone else. I can only articulate what I hear from the guy who IS the coder. If there is something that you feel as though I'm just talking out of my poop-shoot about, then ask me a technical question about it, and I will ask him and then come back and clarify for you. Again, I'm NOT, some "all mighty" programmer. But the guy who coded this is the best I've seen. So, don't assume I'm talking about my self when I'm describing how things are done, or how something works. PLEASE SOMEONE! SPEAK FOR THE ENTIRE GROUP! IF THEY COME BACK AND SPEAK THE TRUTH, AND SAY THAT IT DIDN'T DO AS I DESCRIBED, THEN ADMINS SHOULD CLOSE THE THREAD! Because, frankly I'm quite tired of having to repeat the answers to questions. *EDIT* Just to let everyone know, I have just PM'ed Jcarle personally asking him that if he would like to attend the meeting, that he may do so. And that I would rather remain as professional as possible when we comment and make post. I assure him that I will not waste his time if he came to the meeting.So, if he dosen't take me up on the offer, then all I can do is just demo to those who are not "APT" as you so described. The ball is in your court.

And your statement shows that you didn't read everything. HE (our CP), if I was talking about myself, I wouldn't refer to myself in that tense. To show people that there is more to computer security than what they think they know. And to give an ensight and knowledge to those people who otherwise don't have the resources nor are in a position to be involved in what goes on "underneath" the table in computer security. Listen, I'm no more different than any of you on this board. I don't drive some fancy car, and live in some fancy house. I drive a 95 Toyota Corolla on a daily basis, and whip around the Scion TC on occassions(g/f's daily driver). I just happen to love my job, and I like telling people what this software can do. I don't sale things, and never like selling things ever since grade school when you school had you go door to door to offer candy, and get enough points just to get that shiny gift in the catalog. I'm no different than any of you. Before I started working here, I knew nothing about what goes on in the security sector of computing. The extent of my knowledge stopped with Mcafee, and Symantec as far as I know. But now, I work next to a guy who does have knowledge, skill and far beyond any programmer that I have came across thus far. His knowledge has rubbed off on me some, so I try to answer everyones questions to best of my ability just by watching and studing him. If James Bond was a real guy, and you were working directly under him, wouldn't you want to tell people about some of the cool adventures he took you on?

Short of giving you a free copy, I have gone to great links and taking time out of my schedule to give people a glimpse into the direction I think computer security is heading. Would it be easy for him to put in a time bomb? YES. Does he have the time to do it? NO. Would he do it on my behalf, just to prove to someone who dosen't have any political pull that it works? NO. Not to mention the potential threat of causing damage to our current contracts, and violations of NDA's (you know, all the political crap) that goes along with handing out freebies, I'm just not the person to talk to about that. Maybe not, but everyone is trying to justify that it "DOSEN'T" work based off the fact that I don't have the power to give them freebies. Like I said, I have gone the distance to initiate facts and offers to look at it first hand, but it's not my fault if you didn't take me up on it. I am not just going to go give someone half way around the world to whom I don't even know free software. How do you make any money in a company by giving everything away to whomever ask? I'm not sure what your hobbies are, but I'm into cars, and motorcycles. I have seen countless videos of Skyline GTR's, Koenigsegg CC's, Lambo's, etc.... Can I afford one of those right now? NO. Do I enjoy watching them in action? YES. Would I feel as though Porsche is insulting my intelligence just because they show a live race of their latest Porsche Gemballa GTR doing laps on Tsukuba Circuit, even though I can only dream of having one? NO. So, what's the difference? I'm not insulting your intelligence by showing you something Non of you seem to believe is possible and actually showing/proving to you that it is. 1) I have offered for you to attend the meeting. 2) Those that did/do come, have posted that it's true. (To which they were discredited.) 3) 3rd party sources state that it's a new and different approach to security. And yet, your only justification is because I didn't give you a copy?...Come On Man! It seems as if the reason why this thread is as large as it is, is due to the fact that most of the comments have been directed at trying to disprove what I'm saying without any evidence to back you up, instead of trying to understand how it's able to do what I say it does based off of evidence and backing from 3rd party sources. Find somewhere, somehow, that what we are doing can't be done. And I will show you how it's being done, despite what they say.

Umm...he said "Actually, you may have convinced people that aren't as apt with computers, however I do doubt that you have convinced real programmers and true tech people that you aren't full of it." I didn't say that. I wasn't downing anybodys knowledge of computers, he was. I merely asked him to post his creditials. To which I don't have the answer to that yet. More importantly, I would like to know exactly how many programms were developed that contained shell extentions in them? As well as ATL, WTL, and STL coding. Our CP knows proficiently around 12 or so different coding standards. I state again "Our Chief Programmer" to which is NOT me. I don't even code. So, save the sarcasitic remarks saying that I said I was the all mighty "Coder". I'm talking about someone else, not myslef. Given the RARITY and LACK thereof of how to code using ATL, WTL, and STL, I would love to actually know how much of that he has actually used. And if no one on here has ever been able to extend the shell with code, then how can you be so sure that it dosen't work? Do a search on "ishellexecute" and tell me how many hits you get. So, Symantec gave you a free copy of their software when they first came onto the scene? Let's see, Trend Micro, Symantec, Mcafee all gave you eval copies when they were in their start up phases? How can I score some free software from a start-up company? I think I already apologized to everyone for sounding like a salesman? That's right...I did. You going way back to my first ever post. If you would have read, then you would have saw where I said that I came off a little weird, but did not intend on trying to sale anyone anything, nor did I mean to insult anyones intelligence. I never said it was "perfect", you interpreted it that way, due to the fact that I explained features and capabilites yet duplicated by another solution. And quite frankly, I can see where you might think it sounds a little far fetch. But the fact is, is that it's REAL. What I'm merely trying to convey is that this is where Computer Security is headed, and that this is the next tier level in computer security technology. Ever seen a commercial on TV for a movie that looks so cool and you can't wait to see it, only to find out it dosen't come out for another year? Same principle. I never said it wasn't going to EVER be for sale. I already explained that we have a lot on our plate, and because we are small, we don't have the man power to start passing out free copies, and start taking all the calls from people with stupid questions (who didn't otherwise read the manual).

The icon running in the system tray on my desktop, but the stupid Cardomain logo is covering it.......But wait, I must be faking that too with VB. Showing that the last program that was analyzed and authenticated was mspaint. To which I used to paste a quick PrintScreen of my desktop........but wait, I must have created that in VB as well, just for the sake of fooling everyone. And somehow magically I was replying to your post and making VB programs. Man, I'm multi-talented. Put a File dosen't past a logo on the screen...here you go Click Link to see it in the logo in the system tray.

Ansi or Unicode programming? You're just shooting off terminology to try to impress non-programmers. Unicode and ANSI are character definition standards. If you call yourself a credible programmer because you can convert an ANSI string to a Unicode one... then you have no idea what programming really is. Obviously you do right? You still didn't answer my question..."How many years experience do you have in programming?" By the way, I didn't write the code. By the way, I'm not the programmer that developed this software. How much do you know about Extending the Shell? How much do you know about ATL, WTL, and STL? Exactly how many programms have you created that had shell-extentions in it? Those things do not make you credible. No one said it makes you credible, I was merely pointing out that it's a waste of time to go through all that and waste funds, just to put out a product that dosen't work the way we say it does. Do you have any documented proof? Sure do. Do you have any links to official websites with said information? It's already been posted, re-read the rest of the pages, or do a search. You still haven't answered the relevance of window position information? Point is, why would I have put all that together, that fast for the sake of making a fake screenshot. I have coded in VB before, and I know you can make widows that look like that. But why the heck would I go through the whole process of: 1) Installing VB onto my computer. 2) Creating a project 3) Type in windows positioning coordinates 4) Create buttons and type in respective lables ....Just so I can continue my so called "Dream". That is a bunch of BS quite frankly! Would a desktop shot of the icon in the Task tray work for you? Well, I will post a shot in the next post. Computer = Hardware, Hardware is independant of the OS. And there are methods to implement hardware level protection that is INDEPENDANT of the OS. BIOS protection of the hard drive's boot sector is one of the oldest examples. The NoExecute processor extension is a newer example. Both OS independant hardware implementations. Now your comparing hardware with software, and saying they are the same thing. This is a software solution. The word Independance is in a different context when you are speaking on the terms of Hardware and the OS. So? READ....I described one example of the Independance when I talked about the System driver approach to interception of executables, vs. that of ImmE. Odd, one of your first posts you mentioned "My Co-CEO, also the cheif programmer of the software always comments this "All roads in security lead to Washington".". Guess you must have been demoted pretty quickly from your own company. What the heck are you talking about? That has nothing to do with what you said in the last post. Also the lack of a credible corporate presence That is what I was talking about. "Credible Corporate Presence". I took that as you saying that because the CEO himself is not actually on here talking, that I must be full of it. I thought your company had a website? Can't host a small screenshot on your own website? How many software vendors have screenshots all over their website? Not to mention, I don't control the website anyway. A quick upload and paste is still faster than going to the person in control of updates to the site and having them post screen shots. So now you're not so sure about the quality of your products? What happen to the landslide? Bro! you are way off. Again, that had nothing to do with what I was talking about. You are on a different page than me, and taking what I say and trying to apply it to your comments. Ok, here you said Corporate Leader in information technology and then you posted my description of how good the software is. By saying "Corporate Leader in Information Technology" I took that as a direct comment to "MY" position within the company. "Information Technology" and "Computer Security" are different terminologies. Did you give him a copy to try? Or did you "demo it via NetMeeting"? (For the love of god!) LIVE Meeting is not Net Meeting. RE-Read the post man. So, what now I have to give away free copies just to prove that it works? That's new to me. Where was I when Symantec and Mcafee's network engineers posted on message boards and sent out free copies to anyone and everyone that asked? The relevance of that to ANYTHING is? Really? News to me. It actually does exactly what it's supposed to do. Prevents execution of code in memory segments marked for data. However, the hardware implementation is only half the solution. The operating system must implement it, which Windows XP Service Pack 2 does, and the software must as well. Like all new things, it takes time for everyone to get up to speed. But the hardware is there, available and on the market. The software will follow. The relevance is this....Microsoft made these promises and everything they say that they were going to do and trying to do, the can't make it work. And we have what they failed to do with the hardware approach.....right NOW in a software form. For all the 32 bit Windows. And when 64 bit Longhorn suppose to come around it's going to need ImmE too. You obviously missed the part where forum rules were posted to you and there was a discussion about the administrating of this board within this topic. Obviously you missed what I meant by my comment. I was saying, what does your comment have to do with if the software works or not? Except for maybe like 1 or 2, I have been in compliance with the forum rules. And except for the moving of the thread, I don't believe I have offended the adminstrators in anyway. And despite a few comments to close the thread, it's still going strong. So, obviously there is some interesting statements and truth to what I'm talking about. Actually, you may have convinced people that aren't as apt with computers, however I do doubt that you have convinced real programmers and true tech people that you aren't full of it. Ok, now your insulting everyone else on this thread. Now, no one is good enough to see how valuable the software is, EXCEPT You right? You have so many years of experience in programming that you are now the spokesperson for this thread, and on YOUR behalf (someone who is just now getting to the party), everyone else are idiots and amateurs when it comes to computer knowledge. So, to that sir, I would reply.....Then where are the so called "Real Programmers". I have made countless challenges to any and everyone that thinks they can speak on behalf of the people and have some credibility to their knowledge of computers to come and prove me wrong. Have I had anyone take me up on that? NO. Their EGO's are such a valuable piece to who they are, that they would rather protect that by making comments about how it "DON'T" work than to "PUT UP" and come to the meeting to give me the opportunity to prove them wrong. Will your EGO be that bruised, to find out that you don't know as much as you think you know? And for the people that did come to the meeting, they came back on here to post their comments, only to be shot down and be called stupid too, and get insulted by telling them they didn't know what they were looking at. If you are "SO" sure that it's a "fraud" as you stated, then come to the meeting. Wait, let me guess, "You don't have the time", "I have to take a shower", "I'm not interested in it". Excuses...Excuses. Stop blowing smoke up everyones tails if your not going to come to the meeting....Plain And Simple. I can prove that it works....Can you prove that it dosen't? No one Asked. LIVE = Net....Not likely. Do a search on Microsoft Live meeting. No where did I claim that I was a "PRO". My only intentions are to speak the truth and nothing but the truth. Someone asked my opinions on other solutions, and I gave feedback based off what we had to go through as far as being involved in the gov. meetings and hearing what is starting to take hold of what corp./gov. sectors want out of a product solution. I am giving opinions and nothing more, based off of my experience of hearing some corporate jockey describe to us what they thought would work better for them, and we go do it. Again, I'm not the programmer, again I don't have control over who gets a "freebie" or not. And you just made a claim that I'm blowing smoke because I'm "controlling the environment". Then what about the 3rd party people that make the claims. Am I controlling them too? It's because people (without reading) keep repeating what someone has already asked as to the reason the comments get posted again...again...and again.

I would like to know exactly how much C++, Ansi, Unicode, and C-sharp programming experience that you have to make such a bold statement. I guess we would go through the trouble of : 1) Building a company 2) Creating a website. 3) Governement Testing 4) Certification 5) Skeptisim 6) Countless Gov./Corporate 3rd party websites that have articles and information on our product. 7) Traveling expenses 8) 7,300+ views from a message board (done on my own time not for the benefit of sales, because I like getting on message boards) 9..10..etc... "All so we can fool everyone into believeing that this is real." Guess whe have nothing else better to do. Man, that must have been one hella fast writting and creating boxes to post a screenshot that fast! Wow, if you had been reading any of the post, you would have read the part where I stated that the program is not graphics driven, because it's designed to make the least impact on the OS as far as the resources go. Yet another person who dosen't understand what I meant by independent. Re-Read the last two post that I wrote in their ENTIRETY. More importantly on the part about the Command Processor Interface and the Kernel. Just to point out...."The computer is useless without an OS on it." If I must repeat it again, I shall.....It has it's own EVENT Hadling System. This is a message board, why the heck would my CEO or my Boss want to chat on here? Also, why would I want to find a server to host my own screenshots just to post up on a message board. It was a quick and easy solution to getting these guys a screen shot real quick. No where did I mentioned that I was a "corporate leader" in information technology. I stated that I was the 3rd guy down in the IT/R&D department. If that's considered a Corporate Leadership position, than I think you for the title. Secondly, this is an informal message board, therefore, I don't have to be all mr. "Professional/Corporate Suit and Tie" guy. It's rather hard to fake a program running if people see it with their own two eyes. Those that saw it "live", will not deny that it does what I say it does. Don Damm saw it, why don't you PM him and ask if it's true? Instead of coming on here to just post your skeptisim. I guess you know "Everything". Well, in that case, I guess you already know that when Longhorn comes out, it's still going to run in NTFS, unlike their original plan. Also, you must know that processor solution that they were working on Failed to perform to expectations. Not sure where you were going with this statement, but ok. You are a little late to the party bro. I don't know what direction you are trying to go with this, however, if you ACTUALLY read every last post of every last page, you would see that I have already dealt with the skeptisim involved. And I do believe that we are somewhat past this point. Things are back to normal working conditions. Also, I am about done moving out of my apartment, so I will have some free time to do another live demo. More than likely it will be on Friday 7/29, after work so that will be after 5:00pm CST. You can choose to come if you wish. But if not, I would so kindly appreciate it if you don't start post comments stating how it dosen't do what I say it does when you didn't actually take me up on the offer. PS...If you detected a little sarcasim in my post, then I apologize....

Unfortunately, we don't have VMWare or Virtual PC in the office. So, I just picked a machine that is rarely ever used. So, I just trash the heck out of it, and not have to worry about much. Yeah, it's a step up in that retrospect. However, if you watched the files that it scans, you would notice that they are all .dll's and .exe's. Only executables can it protect for you. Since it didn't secure the command prompt, I just ran the del c: /s /q /f on it. It would pop up whenever the command would try to delete an executable. However, everything else was fair game. Dosen't seem very....skillful in that approach. Imagine, it saves the executables from being deleted for you favorite program, but the files that makeup parts of the GUI are no longer available. Just thinking out loud, but wouldn't that then cause problems when running the program if it's missing non-executable files?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you mean to tell me, that you have to allow parts of the system to be un-protected? People don't save everything in one place all the time, at least I don't. Therefore, IMO, they go down in points even more, when you have to "un-freeze" a section, everytime you need to save something that is NOT and executable. This is to time consuming, and therefore, will not really work for a fast past environment such as a network. It does not seem practical to me, when you try to use the machine on a daily basis, and carry out daily activities. For your situation, it seem to be a fine solution, seeing as how you just didn't want anything moved. But when it comes to actually using it in conjunction with your daily activities, this seems more like a headache. If you forget to un-freeze something, and you just finished saving your document to the system, when you shut down and reboot later, it's gone. And TRUST me, there are people that will do that. And soon enough they will be PO'ed. Again, in comparison to ImmE, it lacks usability.

Ok techniquefreak, I have downloaded a copy of that Anti-executable software. It's pretty good from what I can see. But that statement would be coming from a person who doesn't know anything about security. I think it's a little better than Process Gaurd. It runs in safe mode, to which I was delighted to see. However, I broke the system in about 15 min. I am now having to re-install the OS, because I deleted critical files on it. I have found major issues with Anti-executable. Now, I'm not here to bust it's chops. I'm just posting facts on what I was able to accomplish. Failed test and my thoughts in the use of Anti-Executable Standard (free downloaded version): Configuration of software was set to HIGH, with the Deletion protection Enable, and the Copy protection Disabled(Even with Copy Protection enabled, my test would still be accomplished). Now, the software truely does an excellent job at protecting the Executables from being deleted. Also does an excellent job at protecting "ITSELF", but fails at protecting the rest of the system. Here are the test: 1) What I can and can't delete. Pass:No way possible to delete the executables. Failed:I was able to delete critical OS files. Autoexec.bat(not really critical, but an OS file), Ntldr, and Boot.ini. If you attacked the Windows and System32 folders and wanted to erase everything in it, only the executables will be protected. We know there is more than just executables in the system. 2) What was left accessible. Pass:Would not let me disable "IT'S" service. Also would not let me delete it's registry entry for the service. Failed:Does not secure the command prompt, services, folder options, folder properties (basically all Admin tools). Does not stop me from shutting off all other services, nor editing the registry of the rest of the computer. 3) User Friendly. Pass:It's console is password protected. Failed:With the Deletion Protection enabled, you can't even erase executables off of your own floppy drive (I didn't see if it blocked the format function for formating floopies). To UN-install a program you have to go inside the console every time and disable the Delete Protection function. If you burned a CD with MP3's, documents, data...etc., and a few executables, it's it's going to pop up the "violation" message just from the sure act of you browsing your disk. 4) What I can and can't run. Pass:Would not let me run any new program on the sytem. Failed:Still does not stop script(un-compiled code) files. If you wanted to create a script that deletes your Ntldr and Boot.ini files, this is not going to stop that. Causing you to restore the computer when you rebooted. Scripts will run all day on this machine. I even went to www.finjan.com/Security Lab/Security Testing Center and downloaded a script into the machine to which it did not detect, nor did it stop from running. The script I downloaded and ran created a folder on the machine called "You Have Been Hacked" and copied some documents from my machine into that folder. One of thoes documents contained the User Name: and the Domain Name: of the machine. I was also able to copy an existing executable to another section of the machine, and it ran. I just couldn't rename it is all. 5) Ability to clean the machine. Failed:Everything I ran, did not get eradicated nor quarentined. NOTE: They say in the user manual that Deep Freeze will work with this software, to work in conjunction with each other. Below is a description of how to install new software with both products on a system. The instructions are as follow: 1) Boot the workstation Thawed. 2) Turn Anti-Executable off. 3) Install new software, update existing software, and make any permanent changes to the workstation as required. 4) Restart the workstation if necessary and configure any new software as desired. 5) Turn Anti-Executable on. 6) Boot the workstation Frozen. Just to install one piece of software, or update, it's going to take you 3 BOOTS! That does not go over to well when it comes to corp./gov. environments and networks. That is a MAJOR Fail. I'm not trying to bash, but ImmE is an industry defining solution. If they can't meet on this playing field and be able to get over those Fails, then they are not even close to the level of security/usability that we provide. Even with their products combined, they are not going in the same direction as ImmE. Anti-Exe/Deep Freeze = Great at protection from new compiled programs. ImmE = Great protection from compiled/un-compiled programs + Great protection from the Inside Threat! PS...Thank You for reading such a long post.