Security for windows 2000 enough?

[submix8c]

Google

avg false positives

reveals AVG has a tendency to do that. If you trust it (and the exceptions you place), then I suppose go for it. Also note that AVG "conflicts" in several ways with (e.g.) SpywareBlaster and SpyBot.

Wonder if Avira would work?

[OldSchool38]

Here's a little update, I decided after reading some more information on avast to give it another shot-I was able to get the thing registered and updated via downloading an update file from a hi-speed internet source outside my home and installed it, at first everything seemed alright (I was able to set the .sfc dll to be excluded from scans) however avast apparently attacked other files on my system and when I restarted my computer (had to hit the reset switch due to the fact it wouldn't turn off) the Outpost firewall said some ".sys" file wouldn't load and it was disabled. I gritted my teeth and reinstalled everything, this time I did a custom install of avast where I only selected online protection (e-mail, browser, network, etc) and disabled everything else-I then installed Clamwin (which seems to behave more sensibly) for internal scans. So far so good-but I'm going to give it a week or so and see if there's any surprises, if this doesn't work-I'm throwing in the towel.

Edited July 2, 2013 by OldSchool38

[OldSchool38]

Okay, apparently avast wasn't the problem in that case-did a clamwin scan earlier and it quarantined several files which led to the previous results affecting my firewall, was able to go into the Clamwin folder and restore those items and set the filter to exclude them from future scans. It's taken a while but my goal of a usable, secure windows 2000 installation is finally in sight!

Edit: Here is a list of files that ClamWin was having problems with for those who are thinking of using it with UURollup, you'll have to enter these on the 'filters' setting.

C:\WINNT\system32\dllcache\ndis.sys

C:\WINNT\system32\dllcache\srvany.exe

C:\WINNT\system32\drivers\ndis.sys

Edited July 3, 2013 by OldSchool38

[Browncoat]

re - Outpost Suite v7.1.1 -

http://agnitumblog.blogspot.com/2011/04/outpost-security-suite-free-711.html

Note the stipulations and relation to v6.5.

Meant to say that...been away for a long, long time.

Though I've been happy with 6.5 as is.

Edited August 3, 2013 by Browncoat

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

System Safety Monitor, Outpost Firewall 1.0, Host file and a router. No Anti-Virus software at all, its not needed.

[Tommy]

I've run into more issues on Windows 7 PCs that clients bring me to fix than I've had with my Windows 2000 PC. I use Advanced SystemCare v6, IOBit Malware Defender, Windows Defender and Avast! and very seldom do I run into something that's not good. So as submix8c said, you're as safe as you make your PC. I do the minimal on mine since I really don't have time for all this internet BS but if you ask me, it just really depends what you actually do on your computer. If you're downloading a bunch of crap you don't know what it is or you go to unfamiliar sites due to a search result on Google...well, good luck with that and not getting a virus/malware.

[Phenomic]

I have no anti-virus at all in win2k. I run mostly Linux on the same machine and check both w2k & w7 disks with AVG Free for Linux.

[HarryTri]

Hello compatriot! AVG Free for Linux is detecting Linux viruses, not the Windows ones, you must use AVG Free for Windows to check your Windows partitions (by the way I also use AVG Free and I think it is a really good antivirus program).

[AnX]

I've ran tons of exploits in a Win2k VM with UUR, and none of them worked. At all. Win2k was still usable.

[Phenomic]

Hello compatriot! AVG Free for Linux is detecting Linux viruses, not the Windows ones, you must use AVG Free for Windows to check your Windows partitions (by the way I also use AVG Free and I think it is a really good antivirus program).

AVG for Linux will scan NTFS partitions, ext4 partitions, mounted network shares and virtual machines.

[HarryTri]

Yes, but it will scan for threats that affect Linux.

[jaclaz]

Hello compatriot! AVG Free for Linux is detecting Linux viruses, not the Windows ones, you must use AVG Free for Windows to check your Windows partitions (by the way I also use AVG Free and I think it is a really good antivirus program).

Yes, but it will scan for threats that affect Linux.

Can you provide *any* documentation to support these statements?

Last time I checked the intention of AVG (and most similar antivirus tools for Linux):

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Antivirus

was to avoid that any "Windows" virus or malware was served through the Linux server.

jaclaz

[HarryTri]

Oh, I don't know. It just seemed logical to me that an antivirus for Linux would check for linux viruses (there must be some of them too I suppose).

From the reffered page:

4.BitDefender Antivirus. Limited time trial version available apparently but only after filling in a form. BitDefender checks for Windows viruses. There is a community documentation page about it here.

It doesn't say something like that for AVG.

Edited August 14, 2013 by HarryTri

[jaclaz]

It doesn't say something like that for AVG.

Logical fallacy detected.

You cannot bring up an omission (and particularly an omission by comparison) to support your theory.

The preamble on the given page states:

Why do I need anti-virus software?

Isn't Linux virus-free?

For the most part, Linux is engineered in a fashion that makes it hard for viruses to run (click here for more info). However, there are many reasons you might want a virus scanner on your Linux PC:

• to scan a Windows drive in your PC
• to scan a Windows-based network attached server or hard drive
• to scan Windows machines over a network
• to protect a Windows virtual machine from within the virtual machine
• to scan files you are going to send to other people
• to scan e-mail you are going to forward to other people
• some Windows viruses can run with Wine.
• Linux virus infections are theoretically possible.

I asked to provide some source to backup your (repeated) statements , not - in the absence of them - to attempt nitpicking on the source I provided in support of the opposite.

Oh, I don't know. It just seemed logical to me that an antivirus for Linux would check for linux viruses (there must be some of them too I suppose).

What is logical sometimes differs from reality.

(there must be some of them too I suppose).

See points #7 and #8 in the previous quote, and here:

http://www.howtogeek.com/135392/htg-explains-why-you-dont-need-an-antivirus-on-linux-and-when-you-do/

http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/linux-security-anti-virus.html

jaclaz

Edited August 14, 2013 by jaclaz

[HarryTri]

You cannot bring up an omission (and particularly an omission by comparison) to support your theory.

Yes, but this omission can be the sheer truth and the other stuff "political" nonesense. Anyway, I don't know...

The only thing that I know by common sense is that there isn't and won't ever be virus-proof OS and noone can persuade me for the opposite.

Edited August 15, 2013 by HarryTri