Replies

DenGar,
I’m not saying that your malware didn’t exist, or that PestPatrol has no merit. What I am saying is that I am now discounting what I believe to be false positives found by PestPatrol on my systems. Your machine, as well as your security precautions, may be entirely different than mine.
Yes, it’s possible for the online version to be different than the retail version; there are probably many more options available during a scan done with the retail version. It’s possible that CA has the heuristics cranked up super-high in their online version. Who knows? Maybe someone from PestPatrol will answer Charlotte’s post, and we’ll get some answers. Good question, though.

Charlotte,
I know that Pest Patrol is highly rated, but I’m beginning to have more than a few passing doubts about the program. I just ran the online version of Pest Patrol on my main machine, and it found not only the ISTBar, but also Bonzi Buddy. Needless to say, that grape ape hasn’t been within a mile of my computers, ever! Neither of these “so-called” problems show up in the Registry at the locations that the scans indicate, which tells me that perhaps the folks at Pest Patrol may be doing a little salting in order to drum up business.

Hold on a moment — I just did a little checking…

On another machine — a brand-new installation of XPSP2 — one which IE 6 has seen no other web sites other than Windows Update and Office Update — the Pest Patrol scanner found the ISTBar. It did not find evidence of Bonzi Buddy. Unless Microsoft is installing third party spyware/adware, I don’t see how it is possible for the ISTBar to be there. I think it’s probably a false positive — could be in your case, too.

I rechecked the machine on which traces of Bonzi Buddy were found. There was a Registry key for Bonzi.com, but no value had been set. It’s simply listed as a domain that’s blocked. Big deal — it was a false positive, as I thought. Between SpySweeper, AdAware, Spybot S&D, MS Antispyware, SpywareBlaster, and CleanMOCache, I think I’m pretty well set, and anything PestPatrol finds can be discounted as a false positive.

So, Charlotte, I’m guessing that you may find the ISTBar is a false positive as well.
Liberty R.

I wonder if this means that there will be a shift away from ZoneAlarm at CA? Personally, I like ZAP, but CA’s version always lagged behind the official Zone Labs version by a couple of revisions. It’s possible that CA will incorporate TPF only into its enterprise versions, leaving ZAP for the consumer. Comments?

The full file ( WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU.exe ) works fine as a standalone. I always update XP — both the “gold” and the SP1 versions — with this file, regardless of whether they’re networked. It will detect whether you have XP Home or Pro installed, and will install the appropriate files. As someone mentioned earlier, it’s best to install SP2 right after doing the initial XP installation. This means do NOT update the original file with Windows Update (or Microsoft Update, if you have that installed), but install SP2 onto the “bare” XP installation. Don’t forget to remove your antivirus program and software firewall, and disable any virus checking in your bios prior to installing, as these programs will interfere with the writing of the boot record file(s). You should be fine with the IT networked version of SP2. Just make sure you have a fairly current version of the full file, as it has probably changed, due to security updates, since the file was originally issued, and remember to do Windows Update after the installation is complete. But, you knew all of that anyway. In this forum, I guess I’m just preaching to the choir, but it never hurts to refresh our memories as to procedures that work.

It’s running just fine; no glitches so far. Thanks for the heads up, Tony.

Sorry to hear of your difficulties with the new Spysweeper. I am running it on two machines now (both upgrades from the previous version, 3.5 – one is XP Pro SP2, the other is Windows 2000), and have had no problems whatsoever on either machine. Both are running MS Antispyware beta, AdAware SE, Spybot S&D, and different antivirus programs, browsers, and firewalls. As one of the other posters noted, it’s the old story — what works for one, may not work for another. Anyway, please don’t denigrate SpySweeper simply because you have had a bad experience with it on that one box — I’m sure you weren’t. I don’t work for Webroot, but have found it to be an exceptionally well-written program that works well on every system I’ve tried it on, and think your experience may be the exception, rather than the rule.

I stand corrected; installing the 64-bit version of XP Pro requires a clean installation, according to Microsoft. In other words, you WOULD lose all of your programs and data.

You probably wouldn’t lose much, if any, data, although it would behoove you to do a full backup first using a program such as True Image, Ghost, or Drive Image. You would then be able to fully restore your XP Home version, should the installation go drastically wrong. You would also be able to restore individual files and folders, should you desire to do so. The larger question is this; why do you want to install a 64-bit version of Windows XP on your laptop? It has a 64-bit processor and board? Since you are currently running XP Home, it’s highly doubtful. Very few programs will take advantage of 64-bit processing right now; why not wait until your (new) computer is fully compatible with XP-64 Pro? If you want to install the 64-bit version of XP just because you have a copy of it doesn’t make sense to me. Just an opinion.
Liberty

It seems to run fine for me. BTW, click on the small pair of binoculars on the scan page; a horse will neigh, and a puzzle will pop up that you can play while it’s scanning. Not bad for an Easter Egg in June…

Make sure that you have jumpered both drives correctly, either as Master & Slave, or as both Cable Select. Personally, I don’t trust Cable Select, so I always set the drives to Master & Slave. Once you boot into Windows, should you still not see the Slave drive, you might want to change the drive letter of your CD-ROM from D: to something else (say, drive R:). Reboot the computer after changing the drive letter. If you have set your bios settings *under Plug N’ Play Operating System* to Yes, Windows should assign the next available drive letter — now D: — to the Slave Drive. Your CD-ROM should show up as drive R:, eliminating any conflict. If it still isn’t seen, check your power supply leads to the slave drive — switch them. You may have a dead lead.

Something else you could try would be to use a better quality thermal paste when installing your heat sink/fan. Using Arctic Silver (instead of generic thermal paste) will actually lower your CPU temperature a couple of degrees. I’ve also had good luck with Arctic Alumina, although it doesn’t seem to be quite as effective as their silver-based compound. Should you be using one of the thermal tapes that come pre-stuck to the bottom of most new heat sinks, you might want to switch to using thermal paste. Be aware that you can’t reuse those tapes. But, that’s a last-ditch effort — my guess is that cleaning your CPU fan and installing new front and rear chassis fans will do the trick.

RE: Broccoli Soup Recipe

What a disgusting vegetable to put in a soup! I suppose it’s better than albino broccoli (cauliflower). LOL

Nope, I’ve been virus-free for four years. In 1991, I got something devastating when I tried downloading some Warez (still don’t know what it was) that played havoc with my system. NAV didn’t detect anything, but something was definitely wrong. Wound up reformatting and reinstalling Win98 — it was overdue, anyway. Needless to say, I don’t go looking for Warez anymore!

That CPU temperature is still a little hot. 136F=58C. Your processor should be running somewhere around 50C. Try moving the ribbon cables around so as to get a better air flow in your case, then try adding another case fan. AMD processors are rather finicky about air flow. Having a front-mounted case fan that sucks in cold air, with two rear-mounted fans sucking hot air out usually does the trick. Also, check your CPU fan for a build-up of dust, and clean it out if it’s crudded up. The heat sink fins can also get clogged; this will raise the CPU temperature to unacceptable levels. You really don’t need to be concerned with system temps and hdd temps, unless they’re really out of line with what you should be seeing. The CPU temperature is the important thing with AMD processors, as the critical temp (where your CPU sustain damage) is usually around 70C. HOWEVER, some AMD processors — notably older Thunderbird cores — will run hotter than 50C. My old 1.34 MHZ Thunderbird ran consistently at 58C — normal for that processor. Newer Athlons, Durons, and Semprons run cooler than that, and should (in an ideal world) run around 46-50C, if properly cooled. Also be aware that temperature monitoring software is notoriously inaccurate — some programs are better than others. Motherboard Monitor 5 is good. Just check the build-up of dust on/around the CPU fan, and try shifting the cables around to get better air flow. If that doesn’t help, add fans. Hard wire them to the PSU — personally, I don’t trust software that “slows down” chassis fans. But, get rid of the dust!.

Hi,
I used to get that message when I used Copernic’s Desktop Search. Although I liked Copernic, it generated that error message in conjunction with several programs — not only Outlook. You can temporarily shut it down when backing up Outlook. Copernic is aware of the problem, and may fix the issue in a future release. Ultimately, and unfortunately, I might add, I wound up uninstalling Copernic because of this problem.