A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Windows 10 » Windows 10 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

tl;dr:



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 19th 18, 02:22 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10
David B.[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 182
Default tl;dr:

Do YOU agree with the prognosis/speculation of 'dcollins'?

https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topi...k-my-question/

aside

Great wedding today!

*Share YOUR love* :-D

--
D.
Ads
  #2  
Old May 19th 18, 04:21 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
Shadow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,212
Default tl;dr:

On Sat, 19 May 2018 14:22:39 +0100, "David B."
wrote:

Do YOU agree with the prognosis/speculation of CUT_PERSONAL_NAME ?


Don't know. Put YOUR technical opinion here and we'll discuss it.

I'm assuming you are not posting OT, in which case you will probably
be ignored.

CUT_POSSIBLE_MALICIOUS_LINK


To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber
stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php

The site is safe. 10/10 on WOT.
[]'s

--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
  #3  
Old May 20th 18, 09:55 AM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
David B.[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 182
Default tl;dr:

On 19/05/2018 16:21, Shadow wrote:
On Sat, 19 May 2018 14:22:39 +0100, "David B."
wrote:

Do YOU agree with the prognosis/speculation of CUT_PERSONAL_NAME ?


Don't know. Put YOUR technical opinion here and we'll discuss it.

I'm assuming you are not posting OT, in which case you will probably
be ignored.



That is the rc.common script, which should be found he
/etc/rc.common

This is a script that is no longer used on modern macOS, but it's still
present. It can be a means for providing persistence to malware (malware
can add malicious lines of code to this script). However, I've tested
this on systems from 10.7 and up, and that no longer works. I have been
unable to get custom code added to rc.common to actually run on those
systems.

=

That seems an adequate answer! :bananas:
  #4  
Old May 20th 18, 12:02 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.sys.mac.misc, alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.uk.law
Wolffan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default tl;dr:

On 20 May 2018, David B. wrote
(in article ):

On 19/05/2018 16:21, Shadow wrote:
On Sat, 19 May 2018 14:22:39 +0100, "David B."
wrote:

Do YOU agree with the prognosis/speculation of CUT_PERSONAL_NAME ?


Don't know. Put YOUR technical opinion here and we'll discuss it.

I'm assuming you are not posting OT, in which case you will probably
be ignored.


That is the rc.common script, which should be found he
/etc/rc.common

This is a script that is no longer used on modern macOS, but it's still
present. It can be a means for providing persistence to malware (malware
can add malicious lines of code to this script). However, I've tested
this on systems from 10.7 and up, and that no longer works. I have been
unable to get custom code added to rc.common to actually run on those
systems.

=

That seems an adequate answer! :bananas:


Gee, trollboy, weren’t you bloviating about how it might have been an
eeeeevil malware script which might/might not have been dropped onto your
system by that well-known (to you, anyway) malware distribution tool
EtreCheck? Why, yes you were, in between more bloviating about ClamXAV and
how _that_ is an even greater eeeeevil malware distribution tool. You’re a
lying scumbag troll, and dimmer than a yard up a pig’s ass. Less hygienic,
too.

  #5  
Old May 20th 18, 02:31 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
Shadow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,212
Default tl;dr:

On Sun, 20 May 2018 09:55:42 +0100, "David B."
wrote:

On 19/05/2018 16:21, Shadow wrote:
On Sat, 19 May 2018 14:22:39 +0100, "David B."
wrote:

Do YOU agree with the prognosis/speculation of CUT_PERSONAL_NAME ?


Don't know. Put YOUR technical opinion here and we'll discuss it.

I'm assuming you are not posting OT, in which case you will probably
be ignored.



That is the rc.common script, which should be found he
/etc/rc.common

This is a script that is no longer used on modern macOS


Or old Apples. It was present but inactive on MOST machines.
WTF are you going on and on about it ?
Who's your target this time ? (the question was rhetorical, we
don't want names).

To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber
stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php

The site is safe. 10/10 on WOT.
[]'s

--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
  #6  
Old May 21st 18, 07:40 AM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
Steve Carroll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default tl;dr:

On 20/05/18 12:02, Wolffan wrote:
On 20 May 2018, David B. wrote
(in article ):

On 19/05/2018 16:21, Shadow wrote:
On Sat, 19 May 2018 14:22:39 +0100, "David B."
wrote:

Do YOU agree with the prognosis/speculation of CUT_PERSONAL_NAME ?

Don't know. Put YOUR technical opinion here and we'll discuss it.

I'm assuming you are not posting OT, in which case you will probably
be ignored.


That is the rc.common script, which should be found he
/etc/rc.common

This is a script that is no longer used on modern macOS, but it's still
present. It can be a means for providing persistence to malware (malware
can add malicious lines of code to this script). However, I've tested
this on systems from 10.7 and up, and that no longer works. I have been
unable to get custom code added to rc.common to actually run on those
systems.

=

That seems an adequate answer! :bananas:


Gee, trollboy, weren’t you bloviating about how it might have been an
eeeeevil malware script which might/might not have been dropped onto your
system by that well-known (to you, anyway) malware distribution tool
EtreCheck? Why, yes you were, in between more bloviating about ClamXAV and
how _that_ is an even greater eeeeevil malware distribution tool. You’re a
lying scumbag troll, and dimmer than a yard up a pig’s ass. Less hygienic,
too.


ClamXAV? Why does Apple enable it to run on Apple machines when it *IS*
totally unnecessary and COULD be doing harm? Apple itself should check
it out thoroughly now that ClamXav is no longer available from the App
store.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Snit is not running from this forger, he's running from me.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools -https://gpgtools.org

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJV5iqVAAoJEC03b6bOr/+dmLoQAIdHYN1feyWJ/SVZdvG6QxAa
z8N7UmFjUAJUtwRzPEpDydU/beEoOGsa/M7MRHfOhRv4XJcQWjk6ouQfW0JyQFG9
rYQONKuvpypOTA4suPMHuRelgV8o5vsT6nsnkhu3A3Vl8JT8Qe YvwNlDUtsuPo67
TtJ11dKv9WmtqqV0jspikxaegpb4z8/ipc12/rl6ecLu9xadA/zaWCXinfjKtCdK
sv1Y48I4mxhRzURDBf3ad/XteOCnYRum4IS4fP4WrMhjaOF/zrK2dSKtKdZ5BD6c
DU1wnP52A35i/ZH02EA60sDBS23YBogMTkx3UJ9RW9wxz/x5derTSyK12z8IRAYE
pypLNtDjIzuuebWu17TxVhYjrvy7E2VH5/7ElQmheMlQdAJmQG/GAXozseswBKnV
X+jzVigbsOEHsYWvJuP38g9o1wUPp0lENdQpzu3IohaG9X7wGH Vz9cZ07he5ciCA
tXLtNYcF0/9zoiX2LALGEAOrKkW/APTKkk4FsvPXNf78kdGu9aWd/bygshzUPY9o
LnTVyDluUCSmFI70+FSXUy8pmWrgajv8hYqtlxCaxgQr8x1hnc/wnUSb2zPIfYJT
dzrKAlFJ5HFJf8llwjKNksAVoU/RQ6Q+Yg3RufvoYH2D8b1pk5rLj9C9svPkU18X
7DDD35qwaoj2vKsXG31G
=fwCb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
E-commerce Simplified!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhOfBmWwCVY
http://jeff-relf.me/Cola_Regs.HTM
Jonas Eklundh
  #7  
Old May 21st 18, 08:02 AM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
David B.[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 182
Default tl;dr:

On 20-May-18 12:02 PM, Wolffan wrote:
On 20 May 2018, David B. wrote
(in article ):

On 19/05/2018 16:21, Shadow wrote:
On Sat, 19 May 2018 14:22:39 +0100, "David B."
wrote:

Do YOU agree with the prognosis/speculation of CUT_PERSONAL_NAME ?

Don't know. Put YOUR technical opinion here and we'll discuss it.

I'm assuming you are not posting OT, in which case you will probably
be ignored.


That is the rc.common script, which should be found he
/etc/rc.common

This is a script that is no longer used on modern macOS, but it's still
present. It can be a means for providing persistence to malware (malware
can add malicious lines of code to this script). However, I've tested
this on systems from 10.7 and up, and that no longer works. I have been
unable to get custom code added to rc.common to actually run on those
systems.

=

That seems an adequate answer! :bananas:


Gee, trollboy, weren’t you bloviating about how it might have been an
eeeeevil malware script which might/might not have been dropped onto your
system by that well-known (to you, anyway) malware distribution tool
EtreCheck? Why, yes you were, in between more bloviating about ClamXAV and
how _that_ is an even greater eeeeevil malware distribution tool. You’re a
lying scumbag troll, and dimmer than a yard up a pig’s ass. Less hygienic,
too.


Good morning, 'sock' - how sad it is that you feel a need to hide your
identity. :-(

People who do so invariable raise my suspicions about them. What this
means, in effect, is that visitors to the Apple Support Communities have
to put their complete faith and trust into what is said by, effectively,
complete strangers. From what I have already determined, advice given is
not necessarily checked by Apple staff.

Why the 'Hosts' chose to delete the whole discussion about ClamXav
intrigued me. It wasn't 'logical' as Spock might have said. The
developer of ClamXav, if genuine, should have been only too pleased to
answer questions on the forums.

When one approves the installation of software like ClamXav onto one's
Apple machine, one is giving 'carte blanche' for that software to do
*anything it wishes* on one's computer.

(Carte blanche, a French phrase, meaning "unlimited discretionary power
to act; unrestricted authority".)

You, as the user, will have absolutely no idea whether or not your
computer has been compromised. I believe this to be a FACT!

Just in case you are wondering about the :bananas: ...................

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/for...-one-might-do/

By the way, I'm confident in the advice given by Thomas Reed, now a
Director of Malwarebytes Inc and someone who has a profile on LinkedIn.

https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topi...omment-1243073

What's YOUR view of John Daniel?

https://www.linkedin.com/in/etresoft/

"Etresoft, Inc. is a Canadian software development and consulting
corporation in business since 2015. Etresoft's most popular product is
EtreCheck, a macOS diagnostic tool used by over half a million people
and frequently recommended on Apple Support Communities."

http://www.etresoft.com/

He elected to terminate email contact with me and became quite hostile
on the ASC. That really bothers me. :-(

--
David B.



  #8  
Old May 21st 18, 02:20 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,094
Default tl;dr:

In article , David B.
wrote:


Why the 'Hosts' chose to delete the whole discussion about ClamXav
intrigued me. It wasn't 'logical' as Spock might have said.


it was very logical. there was zero benefit.

The
developer of ClamXav, if genuine, should have been only too pleased to
answer questions on the forums.


not when they're from dumb**** trolls.

When one approves the installation of software like ClamXav onto one's
Apple machine, one is giving 'carte blanche' for that software to do
*anything it wishes* on one's computer.


no different than *any* software.
  #9  
Old May 21st 18, 03:22 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
David B.[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 182
Default tl;dr:

On 21-May-18 2:20 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , David B.
wrote:


Why the 'Hosts' chose to delete the whole discussion about ClamXav
intrigued me. It wasn't 'logical' as Spock might have said.


it was very logical. there was zero benefit.


I'm surprised that you followed the thread. It ran to many pages of
comments and queries. I saw no contribution(s) from you though.

In fact, there's nobody registered on ASC with the user name of 'nospam'

The developer of ClamXav, if genuine, should have been only too pleased to
answer questions on the forums.


not when they're from dumb**** trolls.


I'd never considered MadMacs0 to be a troll. He made some very
interesting posts IMO.

When one approves the installation of software like ClamXav onto one's
Apple machine, one is giving 'carte blanche' for that software to do
*anything it wishes* on one's computer.


no different than *any* software.


True, but Apple's advice is to install *NO* software unless it's
obtained from the 'App Store'.

"Since the App Store launched nine years ago, millions of apps have been
downloaded billions of times. And we’ve used all that we’ve learned to
redesign the App Store from the ground up. Inside are must-read stories,
expert recommendations, carefully crafted lists, helpful how-tos, and
new ways to find your next favourite app or game. This is the biggest
thing to come to the App Store — since apps."

https://www.apple.com/uk/ios/app-store/

--
David B.
  #10  
Old May 21st 18, 06:01 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,094
Default tl;dr:

In article , David B.
wrote:

Why the 'Hosts' chose to delete the whole discussion about ClamXav
intrigued me. It wasn't 'logical' as Spock might have said.


it was very logical. there was zero benefit.


I'm surprised that you followed the thread. It ran to many pages of
comments and queries. I saw no contribution(s) from you though.


there's no need to follow anything. every thread in which you are a
participant has a similar outcome, which is why you are banned in
numerous forums and/or the threads deleted.

In fact, there's nobody registered on ASC with the user name of 'nospam'


further demonstrating just how stupid you are.

The developer of ClamXav, if genuine, should have been only too pleased to
answer questions on the forums.


not when they're from dumb**** trolls.


I'd never considered MadMacs0 to be a troll. He made some very
interesting posts IMO.


whoooooooooooooosh.

When one approves the installation of software like ClamXav onto one's
Apple machine, one is giving 'carte blanche' for that software to do
*anything it wishes* on one's computer.


no different than *any* software.


True, but Apple's advice is to install *NO* software unless it's
obtained from the 'App Store'.


absolutely false. that's not apple's advice at all.
  #11  
Old May 21st 18, 06:10 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
David B.[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 182
Default tl;dr:

On 21-May-18 6:01 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , David B.
wrote:

Why the 'Hosts' chose to delete the whole discussion about ClamXav
intrigued me. It wasn't 'logical' as Spock might have said.

it was very logical. there was zero benefit.


I'm surprised that you followed the thread. It ran to many pages of
comments and queries. I saw no contribution(s) from you though.


there's no need to follow anything. every thread in which you are a
participant has a similar outcome, which is why you are banned in
numerous forums and/or the threads deleted.

In fact, there's nobody registered on ASC with the user name of 'nospam'


further demonstrating just how stupid you are.

The developer of ClamXav, if genuine, should have been only too pleased to
answer questions on the forums.

not when they're from dumb**** trolls.


I'd never considered MadMacs0 to be a troll. He made some very
interesting posts IMO.


whoooooooooooooosh.

When one approves the installation of software like ClamXav onto one's
Apple machine, one is giving 'carte blanche' for that software to do
*anything it wishes* on one's computer.

no different than *any* software.


True, but Apple's advice is to install *NO* software unless it's
obtained from the 'App Store'.


absolutely false. that's not apple's advice at all.


You appear to be wrong on ALL counts, nospam! :-P

--
David B.

  #12  
Old May 21st 18, 08:12 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,094
Default tl;dr:

In article , David B.
wrote:

Why the 'Hosts' chose to delete the whole discussion about ClamXav
intrigued me. It wasn't 'logical' as Spock might have said.

it was very logical. there was zero benefit.

I'm surprised that you followed the thread. It ran to many pages of
comments and queries. I saw no contribution(s) from you though.


there's no need to follow anything. every thread in which you are a
participant has a similar outcome, which is why you are banned in
numerous forums and/or the threads deleted.

In fact, there's nobody registered on ASC with the user name of 'nospam'


further demonstrating just how stupid you are.

The developer of ClamXav, if genuine, should have been only too pleased
to
answer questions on the forums.

not when they're from dumb**** trolls.

I'd never considered MadMacs0 to be a troll. He made some very
interesting posts IMO.


whoooooooooooooosh.

When one approves the installation of software like ClamXav onto one's
Apple machine, one is giving 'carte blanche' for that software to do
*anything it wishes* on one's computer.

no different than *any* software.

True, but Apple's advice is to install *NO* software unless it's
obtained from the 'App Store'.


absolutely false. that's not apple's advice at all.


You appear to be wrong on ALL counts, nospam! :-P


nope.
  #13  
Old May 21st 18, 10:42 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
Shadow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,212
Default tl;dr:

On Mon, 21 May 2018 08:02:55 +0100, "David B."
wrote:

On 20-May-18 12:02 PM, Wolffan wrote:
On 20 May 2018, David B. wrote
(in article ):

On 19/05/2018 16:21, Shadow wrote:
On Sat, 19 May 2018 14:22:39 +0100, "David B."
wrote:

Do YOU agree with the prognosis/speculation of CUT_PERSONAL_NAME ?

Don't know. Put YOUR technical opinion here and we'll discuss it.

I'm assuming you are not posting OT, in which case you will probably
be ignored.

That is the rc.common script, which should be found he
/etc/rc.common

This is a script that is no longer used on modern macOS, but it's still
present. It can be a means for providing persistence to malware (malware
can add malicious lines of code to this script). However, I've tested
this on systems from 10.7 and up, and that no longer works. I have been
unable to get custom code added to rc.common to actually run on those
systems.

=

That seems an adequate answer! :bananas:


Gee, trollboy, werent you bloviating about how it might have been an
eeeeevil malware script which might/might not have been dropped onto your
system by that well-known (to you, anyway) malware distribution tool
EtreCheck? Why, yes you were, in between more bloviating about ClamXAV and
how _that_ is an even greater eeeeevil malware distribution tool. Youre a
lying scumbag troll, and dimmer than a yard up a pigs ass. Less hygienic,
too.


Good morning, 'sock' - how sad it is that you feel a need to hide your
identity.


Makes STALKING hard, heh ? It IS the norm on Usenet, though,
for that very reason.
(and weird, coming from someone with 20 nyms.)

CUT_OFF_TOPIC_STALKING_CONTENT


To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber
stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php

The site is safe. 10/10 on WOT.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
  #14  
Old May 21st 18, 11:27 PM posted to alt.computer.workshop, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.sys.mac.misc, alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.uk.law
Wolffan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default tl;dr:

On 21 May 2018, David B. wrote
(in article ):

True, but Apple's advice is to install *NO* software unless it's
obtained from the 'App Store'.


oh? Really? Where is this stated?

  #15  
Old May 22nd 18, 08:21 AM posted to alt.computer.workshop,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.uk.law
David B.[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 182
Default tl;dr:

On 21-May-18 11:27 PM, Wolffan wrote:
On 21 May 2018, David B. wrote
(in article ):

True, but Apple's advice is to install *NO* software unless it's
obtained from the 'App Store'.


oh? Really? Where is this stated?


Please ask your question on the Apple Support Communities forums.

You'll get an answer there which will invariably be correct.

https://discussions.apple.com/welcome

HTH

--
David B.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.