Memory and other upgrades for photo editing

Started Dec 27, 2012 | Discussions thread
Scott Eaton
Senior MemberPosts: 1,989
Like?
Re: great - I'd scan for malware, too
In reply to Jim Cockfield, Jan 1, 2013

>>because the malware is returning false results to the scanners

For this reason I'm pretty much using Avast's boot time scan option exclusively. In fact, I will no longer bother with Malware / Spyware scanners that can't do this. It's time consuming and annoying, but offline scans are fixing more issues than I'm able to correct with online scanners combined. Only a well written rootkit can hide from an offline scan. Avast's popularity comes and goes, but their offline / boot time scan option is pretty tenacious.

Malware writers are increasingly writing their code to avoid critical system areas and subsystems that will trip the heuristic engine on your typical Spyware scanner. Rather than try to 'brick' your system so you can't get rid of it aka Win XP they're increasingly working with APIs that hide code in temp locations and profile directories no different than low level installation procedures. Microsoft has done a pretty decent job patching things on the other end and Win8 is even stronger then Win 7, so I'm seeing an evolution in malicious software that's less malicious but just as efficient and tries to stay under the radar.

Oh yeah, kudos for dealing with memory speed explanation and debunking above. Not sure why we're still even talking about memory speed and timing in 2013......those discussion should have been retired with Netburst and LED fans. Trying to remember the last time RAM timing came up in a discussion regarding VSphere clusters or setting up NUMA on really big blade clusters, and the answer is....never.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow