hijackthis.exe...

hijackthis.exe...

Secure Home | Search | About
 Microsoft Antivirus Discussions    Post an article   get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content add this group's latest topics to your Google content
Subject Author Date
hijackthis.exe... RJK 11-08-2007
Posted by BoaterDave on December 28, 2007, 4:03 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Hi Richard - *please* go back ............. and read my most recent post(s).

PM me from there if you wish.

Dave

************************************************
> No,
>
> Obviously Bill Castner either cannot see straight, or chose to distort my
> posts right from the start, with a hostile attitude from getgo. Quite why
> eludes me.
>
> I collected Hijackthis.exe v2.02 from aumha.org v2.0.2 (file version
> 2.0.0.2), and just for something to do really, submitted it to the CLS's
> at VirusTotal.com, where three of them, didn't like it. This remains
> fact. I then submitted an older version of HJT from my PC where only one
> CLS's didn't like it. That also remains fact. All of that was accurately
> conveyed in my posts, albeit a little jumbled up.
> He obviously didn't want to make any constructive comment on that, (which
> I thought would have been an interesting topic), but, immediately launched
> into a torrent of vitriol ...something like. "...you've publicly accused
> aumha of distributing infected software..."
>
> It appears that he was simply unable read something as it was literally
> and honestly intended whilst at the same time making wildly fictitious,
> and almost abusive assumptions.
>
> I deleted what I could from my posts, and will not go there again, it's
> simply not worth wasting breath in there, or on him !
>
> regards, Richard
>
>
>> Richard, the thread in question is here:
>> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=29981
>>
>> However, you'd now edited all of your posts to the thread in an
>> apparent effort to cover your mistakes. I'm glad to know that you
>> cannot do so here.
>>
>> According to MVP & AumHa VSOP Bill Castner (who was actively
>> monitoring the thread), in one of your now-edited posts you admitted
>> that you'd submitted (1) an earlier version of HijackThis (e.g.,
>> v1.99.1) to VirusTotal and that (2) you had NOT downloaded it from
>> AumHa Downloads.
>>
>> As another AumHa VSOP and an AumHa Forums Admin, I demand a public
>> apology from you, both here and in the forum thread, for besmirching
>> the reputation of MVP Jim Eshelman and his AumHa website/forums.
>> --
>> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>> MS MVP-Windows (IE, OE, Security & Shell/User) since 2002
>> AumHa VSOP and Admin
>>
>>> ...that was my thought as well but, thought it my observation might
>>> generate
>>> some usefeul observations !
>>> ...in http://aumha.net/viewforum.php?f=30"Hijackthis Logs" discussion
>>> forum, Bill Castner
>>> ...decided to "distort" and "misinterpret" my question and get all sort
>>> of
>>> "protective" of Jim Eshelman !
>>> ...quite sweet really, though not very useful !
>>>
>>>
>>> > RJK wrote:
>>> >> hijackthis.exe file version 2.0.0.2 collected from aumha.org a few
>>> >> hours ago,
>>> >> submitted it to Virustotal :-) ...call me suspicious ?
>>> >> ...I wouldn't dare cast aspersions on Jim Eshelman !
>>> >> ...it crossed my mind that Trend (who bought "hijackthis"could be
>>> >> adding something "not nice" to it !
>>> >> ...3 false positives maybe :-
>>>
>>> >> eSafe7.0.15.02007.10.28 suspicious Trojan/Worm
>>> >> Panda9.0.0.42007.11.06 Suspicious file
>>> >> Webwasher-Gateway6.0.12007.11.08Win32.ModifiedUPX.gen!90 (suspicious)
>>>
>>> >> views please ?
>>>
>>> >> regards, Richard
>>>
>>> > Version 1.99 also has a false positive
>>> > eSafe 7.0.15.0 2007.11.08 suspicious Trojan/Worm
>>>
>>> > I would'nt worry about it.
>>
>
>
>



Posted by RJK on November 8, 2007, 6:44 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
I just reread your post.

I am sorry but, I will NOT apologize for something I haven't said or done !

regards, Richard


> Richard, the thread in question is here:
> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=29981
>
> However, you'd now edited all of your posts to the thread in an
> apparent effort to cover your mistakes. I'm glad to know that you
> cannot do so here.
>
> According to MVP & AumHa VSOP Bill Castner (who was actively
> monitoring the thread), in one of your now-edited posts you admitted
> that you'd submitted (1) an earlier version of HijackThis (e.g.,
> v1.99.1) to VirusTotal and that (2) you had NOT downloaded it from
> AumHa Downloads.
>
> As another AumHa VSOP and an AumHa Forums Admin, I demand a public
> apology from you, both here and in the forum thread, for besmirching
> the reputation of MVP Jim Eshelman and his AumHa website/forums.
> --
> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> MS MVP-Windows (IE, OE, Security & Shell/User) since 2002
> AumHa VSOP and Admin
>
>> ...that was my thought as well but, thought it my observation might
>> generate
>> some usefeul observations !
>> ...in http://aumha.net/viewforum.php?f=30"Hijackthis Logs" discussion
>> forum, Bill Castner
>> ...decided to "distort" and "misinterpret" my question and get all sort
>> of
>> "protective" of Jim Eshelman !
>> ...quite sweet really, though not very useful !
>>
>>
>> > RJK wrote:
>> >> hijackthis.exe file version 2.0.0.2 collected from aumha.org a few
>> >> hours ago,
>> >> submitted it to Virustotal :-) ...call me suspicious ?
>> >> ...I wouldn't dare cast aspersions on Jim Eshelman !
>> >> ...it crossed my mind that Trend (who bought "hijackthis"could be
>> >> adding something "not nice" to it !
>> >> ...3 false positives maybe :-
>>
>> >> eSafe7.0.15.02007.10.28 suspicious Trojan/Worm
>> >> Panda9.0.0.42007.11.06 Suspicious file
>> >> Webwasher-Gateway6.0.12007.11.08Win32.ModifiedUPX.gen!90 (suspicious)
>>
>> >> views please ?
>>
>> >> regards, Richard
>>
>> > Version 1.99 also has a false positive
>> > eSafe 7.0.15.0 2007.11.08 suspicious Trojan/Worm
>>
>> > I would'nt worry about it.
>




The site map in XML format XML site map

Contact Us | Privacy Policy