# Microsoft passes latest VB100 virus test; Some security giants fail !



## anandk (Dec 5, 2007)

The December 2007 edition of the VB100 test subjected security software to 100 Windows 2000 viruses collected from labs and websites. Researchers at Virus Bulletin have released the results of the latest VB100 computer security test, highlighting failures at a number of leading security vendors.  

Products from *Kaspersky, Sophos, Trend Micro and Norman were among those that failed *to protect fully against a collection of outdated viruses. 

Companies whose products passed the test included Microsoft, NOD32, AVG, BitDefender, Symantec, McAfee, Sunbelt and QuickHeal.  

WinVistaClub Security or Castlecops HomePage. Take your pick !


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 5, 2007)

Plz correct the link in your site, anand. The pages on virus bulletin open only if you are registered. Rather post direct links here.


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 5, 2007)

Thats good...
I like nod actually...
But i didnt know why kaspersky failed..
Ok why test with windows 2000 virus.. I dont get it.
Anyway thanks for info.
And ya ms rocks ...


Off topic..
Sorry to note it anand but, is it right to link to your blog or site? When the real source is somewhere? 

No offence dude..

If yöü feel it s against rules please change it...coz many newbie will follow only legends like yöü... 
Please dont take it in other way..


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Dec 5, 2007)

It means windows is not safe even with paid antiviruses.But a common sense works great deal.


----------



## Faun (Dec 5, 2007)

^^lol Quick Heal is coming back from grave.
especially designed for win 2000 viruses.


----------



## din (Dec 5, 2007)

naveen_reloaded said:
			
		

> Sorry to note it anand but, is it right to link to your blog or site? When the real source is somewhere?



I think it is allowed ! Some other members also use the same style. I mean mentioning their own site/blog as news source and then in that site/blog mentioning the real source.

Sure it helps to get traffic.


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Dec 5, 2007)

^^heh so we need to have multiple AVs now huh?one for 98,one for 2k,one for xp,and one for vista,and heck one more for dos viruses.lol.


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 5, 2007)

^i dont think it allowed HERE..
Sorry if i am wrong.but i have seen many thread being closed or moved to chitchat section's blog stuff thread...


----------



## din (Dec 5, 2007)

Sorry for going offtopic

*www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=74934

Thats another example.

May be some mods/admin can clarify, I mean whether such practise is allowed here.


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Dec 5, 2007)

^^there are many by this guy and naveen has reported them all.
I think a mod\admin need to clearify things here.


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 5, 2007)

Guys i have seen threads closed by drgrudge stating that to post the original source and not link to thier sites or blog.
I am not against them ,but i want this forum to be clean..that marulez guy was posting loads of news off lately simply to get traffic..if this IS allowed then many follow the road and we will all see 100 new threads in tech news alone for each day.


----------



## din (Dec 5, 2007)

@naveen_reloaded

I got what you meant. Yes, I also think it is better to post the orginal link instead of the blogs and user sites.


----------



## cool_techie_tvm (Dec 5, 2007)

^^ I agree with din, why not post the original source??


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 5, 2007)

Thanks din for supporting...
Now itself we are seeing many update thread..i dont get it..should EVERY 4.26xx version should be mentioned here.. I dont get it.if its say, opera released a next version say opera 10 mentioned, i will be happy..but what is there to point to when it gets a update...say 9.2659? 
If thats so kaspersky,and other av are publishing new database every hour!i hope yöü all got the point.

Again thanks din


----------



## kalpik (Dec 5, 2007)

This test has NOTHING to do with how good an antivirus is! An antivirus will fail in this test even if it has 99.99% detection rate, and gives a few false positives..


----------



## din (Dec 5, 2007)

People seems misusing the loophole in the forum rules ! Coz it is not clearly mentioned that members are not supposed to post their own sites / blogs (obviously thats for getting more traffic), may be the admin need to modify the rules sticky to add this too.


----------



## blackpearl (Dec 5, 2007)

I don't believe VB100 tests.


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 5, 2007)

I have pm'd drgrudge and he has taken action on one of the thread. And also pointed him to this thread to clarify the doubt. 
Sorry for posting off topic stuff here..i am very sorry.


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 5, 2007)

You SHOULD post the full article with the source links (now you can link your site/blog). It's OK to post what you posted in your blog even though the source is outside, but make sure that you post full article here AND the article is full not like:- 
Click here ---> goes to your blog , again click ---> news source


anandk - 
Take care next time. Else thread(s) will be deleted.


----------



## iMav (Dec 5, 2007)

im confused ur warning anand and still saying that 1 can link his site/blog


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 5, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> im confused ur warning anand and still saying that 1 can link his site/blog


Did you read fully what I posted. I think it's clear as to what is allowed and what's not.


----------



## din (Dec 5, 2007)

What *drgrudge* explained is very clear.

The members can post their site or blog as source provide they post the full article here in this forum.

That means you can't post first few lines of a news and then a source link which goes to your site.

That is a good idea as people can read teh full news without going to some other blog or personal site.

Thank you for clarifying it.


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 5, 2007)

Ok i think here is what drgrudge says..
Post FULL ARTICLE...with link to the original site where yöü took...AND THEN yöü can post link to your site..

Please if possible change it in the "announcement" thread about rules...

Coz i dont think many will see this thread for this rule.

Again thanks for swift action and clearing our doubt doc..


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 5, 2007)

Our Announcement needs some editing apart from this. I can't edit announcements, only Admins can. Please PM FatBeing and let him know.


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 5, 2007)

What kinda editing apart from this.i dont get yöü?

Is admins come here? I rarely see them.sorry if i am wrong.i haven noticed them..except in some posts


----------



## iMav (Dec 5, 2007)

well acc to what ur laws say i dont know but from what i personally feel is that posting the crux of the article and linking is the best way to post an article coz then 1 can get the basic info and if wants more info can follow the link ... however its u guys who run the place its ur rules


----------



## din (Dec 5, 2007)

@iMav

You are confused

What *drgrudge* says is - two options

1. If you want to link the news to your site or your blog instaed of original article (to get more traffic and visitors to your site / blog), you have to post the entire news and then source link as your site/blog. So that people are not forced to visit your blog/site to get full information. 

2. You can also post the news in short, like only the important part of news and rest and source as original site / link and *not* your site. So for reading the rest of the news people will be going to the original site and not any personal site.

Clear ?

Basically, this is to discourage member's tricky idea to get traffic to their own forums /blogs / personal sites which will have lot of ads and stuff. And this will also help the thinkdigit forum to be clean.

In short,for example,  if you get some news from Microsoft site and want to post it here, post part of the news here and give link to MS site. Or post the full news here and give source link to your personal site. Got it ?


----------



## iMav (Dec 5, 2007)

i just said what i felt in my personal capacity  i am against plagiarism but posting news with half article full article this link that link this source that source well just seems more BCCIish to me


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 5, 2007)

Imav hope yöü get the point..its not about the news..its about the junk threads being opened to get traffic to thier sites  ..quality of the news being postied and ability of newbie to seperate a good one from junk will become more difficult.i hope they change the rules so that a minimum no of post is needed to start a thread in particular section except q&a,mobile ,games,etc...this way even bots can be stopped effectively... 
And also thread can be modified so that users can vote to the thread and also to the replies within a thread..this way many threads will automatically get cleaned...just like digg...
P.s i feel digg way of function should be inherited,..
This is my opining..
As yöü said..they run the show..its thier call in the end


----------



## anandk (Dec 5, 2007)

first, i think i was one of the 1st to post this news on the net after i saw the results. 

you can always visit the vb100 site and search for the results. i took time to register there, (YOU have to register to see the results) saw the results, collated them and posted them at my site. 

*had i not posted the results/conclusions here too, but instead just posted the link to my site, it would have been objectionable !* i CANNOT post the whole report here. you HAVE to register at virusbtn to see the summary only !!! and if you want the whole report you have to get it by post ! and one cant post the report elsewhere...only the summary !

as far as i can see, if a site-owner has taken trouble to collect/collate information at his site and then posted it here, pointing it to his site, he is entitled to post the link ! would you have objected to it if i had posted the link to some western site  dont think so ! it so happens wvc reported it first and it happens to be mine !

and please ! i am already being burdened by increasing bandwidth costs  ... dont think id want to pull traffic by just posting links just for the heck of it  since i consider digit as my home-forum, after posting at wvc i usually post here too.

so i think the subtle warning by drgrudge to me does not stand ! 

nevertheless, if the mods wish to delete/lock my threads anytime they are most welcome to do so ! after all, this IS a private forum; and pls, let the debate end here; it will, from my side.


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 5, 2007)

Good point though.but sorry to have made issue over it.but in the end we all got a point on how to post and how not to..hope this remains for other posters also.
Thanks anandk for taking pain in explaining.we all appreciate your work dude...
Keep coming


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 5, 2007)

anandk - 
What's wrong in posting the full article? Even if your site is the news source or first to break the news. Many will visit your site seeing how good you write or useful things you post about. Atleast I will. 

Increase in BW cost or the time you took to register there shall not be a valid reason why you're doing like this. Does a flight wait for you just because you were held up in traffic? Think of this forum. Most of the technology news is either OS wars or self promotions. 

Let this pass off. End of the issue. Next time around, you post full article or don't post. 

Back to the topic!


----------



## iMav (Dec 5, 2007)

din i guess u got it wrong as to what drgrudge meant


----------



## din (Dec 6, 2007)

*@iMav
*
Read both the quoted post below once / twice  and then decide.



			
				din said:
			
		

> 1. If you want to link the news to your site or your blog instaed of original article (to get more traffic and visitors to your site / blog), you have to post the entire news and then source link as your site/blog. So that people are not forced to visit your blog/site to get full information.





			
				drgrudge said:
			
		

> anandk -
> What's wrong in posting the full article? Even if your site is the news source or first to break the news. Many will visit your site seeing how good you write or useful things you post about. Atleast I will.



*@anandk*


			
				anandk said:
			
		

> and please ! i am already being burdened by increasing bandwidth costs  ... dont think id want to pull traffic by just posting links just for the heck of it  since i consider digit as my home-forum, after posting at wvc i usually post here too.



You are a senior member here and I read most of the topics you post. One thing I noticed is, you post majority in the tech news section and that is really appreciated, very nice work indeed. Do not want to offend you, but most (not all but many) article you post has source link as your site. If you are worried on your site bandwidth issue, why taking trouble posting the link/source as your site ? That will make more burden on you isn't it ?


----------



## a_k_s_h_a_y (Dec 6, 2007)

this is just advertisement .. if it were someone else then he would kicked out of the forum
and why not him ???????


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 6, 2007)

Good question..but he is a good contributor.  
Ya reach more than 2k post ..no one question...

I am getting sick of all these.
I better go to digg and find my news there...


----------



## praka123 (Dec 6, 2007)

a good warning for other advertisers(blog/sites) too!


----------



## Choto Cheeta (Dec 6, 2007)

By the way, lets come back to ontopic 

How many of us know what Forfront actually is ??

*www.microsoft.com/forefront/default.mspx

its not a Desktop product with end user access support... also its not a single product 

Forefront uses many AVS scanning engines under server enviroment, like ur mail server or under Network scanner...

and even though KIS / Symantec / Trend Micro all failed, but actually ForeFront is made up with all those failed individual products...

The idea of Linux command line scanning has now a place in Microsoft too...  Fore Front addresses the issue of using multiple AVS scanner with their own updates and updating engines  under one single OS platform... 

has an issue of High memory requirements though as it will use may be up to 8 AVSes at times


----------



## Voldy (Dec 6, 2007)

thanks for the info anandk
but i wonder why Kaspersky failed the test ?( cuz i am using that one )


----------



## Faun (Dec 6, 2007)

Vicky333 said:
			
		

> thanks for the info anandk
> but i wonder why Kaspersky failed the test ?( cuz i am using that one )


dont be paranoid it always come down once in a lifetime

btw imo posting the original source link is a must, after that post link to ur blog/site.


----------



## Indyan (Dec 6, 2007)

VB100 virus test is a huge pile of crap. Passing it doesnt mean u r bad and failing it doesnt mean u r good.


----------



## naveen_reloaded (Dec 6, 2007)

^what?


----------



## anandk (Dec 6, 2007)

drgrudge said:
			
		

> Next time around, you post full article or don't post.



i will do what i have to do; and u r free to what u have to do !  

anyway; i have changed/added another link (a more reputed website) as source-link in my 1st/main post. 
so take your pick. maybe that shud settle the issue  ... hopefully ! 



			
				Vicky333 said:
			
		

> thanks for the info anandk
> but i wonder why Kaspersky failed the test ?( cuz i am using that one )



sorry i almost misd that one buddy. kaspersky misd only 1. avast and avira gave 2-4 false positvs, hence they too failed. i stl think all such test are 2 b taken with a pinch of salt. nod32/kaspersky are among the finest !


----------



## din (Dec 6, 2007)

anandk said:
			
		

> anyway; i have changed/added another link (a more reputed website) as source-link in my 1st/main post.
> so take your pick. maybe that shud settle the issue  ... hopefully !


WOW

Never expected this from a senior member !!

Thinkdigit -> My blog -> Original source -> News

changed to

Thinkdigit -> My post in another site -> My blog -> Original source -> News

Man, why making this much trouble ? ? Why not making it simple for others by providing all info / full article in a single post in ThinkDigit forum itself ?


----------



## anandk (Dec 6, 2007)

i give up folks ! u win  !

i repeat; i cannot reproduce the FULL virusbtn article ! i can only register, read, discuss and link back to that page. for ppl to read the summary u have to register ! if anyone wants to have the full report; YOU HAVE to request one AND they send YOU a PERSONAL copy by mail. i hope someone understands. what appears on my site, appears here and on castlecops too. this has always been my style; post the gist and link back to the source. if u see my old posts, evn b4 wvc, u will know what i am saying !

actually i dont see what the fuss is all about; *castlecops posts it on its homepage but some digitforum mod/member, where i am considerd to be an 'old trusted member' objects to it.*

dear drgrudge : if u feel, pls modify/edit/lock or treat the thread as u feel.



			
				a_k_s_h_a_y said:
			
		

> .. if it were someone else then he would kicked out of the forum and why not him ???????



thanx buddy ! really appreciate yr comment ! 

nevertheless, as suggested above, you will not be seeing *any new posts *from me here. will only answer/help where i can. as far as i know, i have not broken any rule ! and in any case all it will take, is one simple pm to me from the mods; and i will stop visiting this forum. it will be a sad day for me ... but then change is the only constant in life !


----------



## din (Dec 6, 2007)

@anandk

Hey, I never menat to hurt you. You are a very senior and reputed member here and I am noway near you compared to that. Please stay in Thinkdigit, please do not leave the forum on this issue.

There is no need to feel bad. It happens. What drgrudge/me/other members mentioned is that, when the original source is there, no need to post another link that points to the original source. That will make the forum (not this, but any) neat and clean. 

Your intensions may be good, but problem is, new members in this forum will look at your posts - as you are very senior here - and they wil l start (as you can see already started !) posting links to their blogs for traffic. I hope you understand.

The rules are for the goodwill of forum and members, and yes, you didn't break any rules at all. But when you post the news with your blog link, it is same as advertising your blog/site (again I never meant you tried to do that, I meant it will sound like that) and that is the reason others including myself objected.

I know you edited the first post and added the 'other link' may be in frusttation, please do not feel bad, we are all here to help each other. 

Regarding the post, you can give details - like the original news site need us to register to read full article, may be the regn link etc. That will make it clean.

Anyway, forget it all, please come back. We do not want to miss you. No hard feeling yaar. Dil pe mat rahna re


----------



## GNUrag (Dec 6, 2007)

I agree with din there.


----------



## shantanu (Dec 6, 2007)

anand : there is no point for you to leave.. we all value you and your posts. the thing is just about rules.. its same for everyone.. you are right in this matter, but its not the case everywhere.. and 
AKSHAY : Think twice what you say the next time.. you are not to decide what you and what should not be done... Peace..


----------



## a_k_s_h_a_y (Dec 6, 2007)

shantanu  you are right .. i must think twice before i say something .. i usually don't do that
but there i thought thrice !!!  !! because i knew that you are here !!

and i did not decide what should be done .. ! i just told what would other mods would have done !
and if you see it clearly... its a question to others .. in no way its a suggetion to anyone !!
i don't know what you will do !! coz i haven't seen you at the forum and i have no idea about how you go with things since i am new here !!  the days when  you socialized here.. i was not here !

usually people are warned once and twice .. ! that's all i know .. so i guess its my mistake to say that word !! 

well sorry if i hurt you or anand !!

and anand i meant enough of advertising your website .. please post your articles completely here.. as you know its not allowed ..
you can count out how much from here !!

many a times i have to navigate out side digit from all your articles to get full articles ! so i better don't come to digit at all for news !! coz i know i wont get full stuff here .. just get them right in digg !


----------



## Cyrus_the_virus (Dec 7, 2007)

Is this test supposed to prove that Windows 2000 is better than Vista? *gigasmilies.googlepages.com/7.gif


----------



## narangz (Dec 7, 2007)

@Cyrus-Do you have any stuff worth reading to post? If not please stop trolling!!!
I previously asked you if have you ever used windows vista(genuine)and m still waiting for your reply.


----------



## Cyrus_the_virus (Dec 7, 2007)

narangz said:
			
		

> @Cyrus-Do you have any stuff worth reading to post? If not please stop trolling!!!


Dude, mind your words, I'm not trolling, If you think genuine questions are too personal for you, then don't bother quoting me and don't take out some other frustration you have on me. Please don't bother me with any of your fanboyism. If you have an answer for the question I asked, then please do. Else better shut up and stop quoting me for your personal frustration with Vista



			
				narangz said:
			
		

> I previously asked you if have you ever used windows vista(genuine)and m still waiting for your reply.


When did you ask that? Anyways, I dont' use Vista, I dumbed it long back and yes, it was a genuine copy!


----------



## narangz (Dec 7, 2007)

^^oh really? 

i know what you do in windows/ms threads. and m not going to reply further to your posts in this thread...


----------



## praka123 (Dec 7, 2007)

Microsoft paid leading warez/crackers/hackers $$$,so that Vista should survive upto SP1.then when SP1 also became vulnerable,M$ will give more $$$'s dont u woooorrrry 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Howz that!?


----------



## narangz (Dec 7, 2007)

^^Yeah, Ballmer told you that


----------



## shantanu (Dec 7, 2007)

praka and others stop trolling and posting BS... 

Praka enough of your BS everywhere.. you hate windows let it be.. dont spoil every thread.. ! last warning before you get banned.. cyrus and narangz : maintain peace guys..


----------



## FatBeing (Dec 7, 2007)

The "source" issue: 

1. Avoid reproducing entire articles: depending on the source, it might be illegal to reproduce content in its entirety. Partial reproduction with a citation is much less likely to cause legal hassles. Also, it's only fair that the person who wrote the article get a little traffic for his / her efforts.

2. You're more than welcome to cite your personal blogs as sources, if (*and only if*) you are the original creator of the content. I've updated the rules to this effect. 

What this means is that members should navigate thus: Digit > Original source and not Digit > member blog > original source. 

If you have made previous posts that violate this rule, please take the weekend to replace your blog link with the original source. _This applies to all members_. 

Violations henceforth will be dealt with thus: for a first offence, your post will be edited and the link removed. Repeating the offence too much will have you spending at least a week in misery. 

If there are any objections to the way a member is linking to articles, do bring it to the moderators' and/or the adminstrators' attention, and we'll look into the matter.

If anyone needs clarification, now's your chance.


----------



## Choto Cheeta (Dec 7, 2007)

Hello Admin.

May I request you to please delete all the post in this thread which was on the issue of source !!!!

Please leave only topic which is discussion the actuall issue or VB100 test 

as the source issue is now addressed can we foucous only on the On topic issue..

I also request all mebers and mods who have posted here to please delete their off topic posts 

Thank you

Regards,
Saurav Basu....


----------



## iMav (Dec 7, 2007)

i hope things are now clear to drgrudge & din  thank u fat being for clearing things and sorry choto sir for my off topic post


----------



## Batistabomb (Dec 7, 2007)

naveen_reloaded said:
			
		

> Thats good...
> I like nod actually...
> But i didnt know why kaspersky failed..
> Ok why test with windows 2000 virus.. I dont get it.
> ...



do you really like NOD32


----------



## narangz (Dec 7, 2007)

shantanu said:
			
		

> cyrus and narangz : maintain peace guys..



That's why I said I wont be replying to such posts here. Thank you


----------



## din (Dec 7, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> i hope things are now clear to drgrudge & din



iMav, please do not start behaving immature again.

Your post sounds like *drgrudge* and *din* were confused on something and *FatBeing* cleared it !!!

A very senior member done a mistake (repeated many times) and many people objected it. *drgrudge* made it clear by explaining, you didn't get it (atleast you pretended so), I explained the same thing again, all agreed to that including that senior member. After that the topic got diverted by some others and finally FatBeing well explained and cleared the issue.

What *FetBeing*, *drgrudge* and *din* stated - are all exactly the same thing and that is for the goodwill of this forum and all members. That is not against anyone personally. Even the member involved in that agreed to that and I do not have any clue why you are still behind it.

Please stop behaving immature, please, thats a very personal request from me.

Others - I am extremely sorry for posting this, but I got provoked by iMav's immature post above. Sorry, please feel free to ignore my post.

Thank you.


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 7, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> i hope things are now clear to drgrudge & din  thank u fat being for clearing things and sorry choto sir for my off topic post


You talk as if I made a mistake. IMO, myself, din or anyone didn't. This issue happened for good. naveen_reloaded PMed me to clarify and I interfered. Since the rules weren't clear, I asked FatBeing to clarify. 

You really provoke other members. Be warned.


----------



## iMav (Dec 7, 2007)

ok i didnt want to post another off topic post but it seems i need to quote fatbeing here so please bear with my off topic post



			
				FatBeing said:
			
		

> The "source" issue:
> 
> 1. Avoid reproducing entire articles: depending on the source, it might be illegal to reproduce content in its entirety. Partial reproduction with a citation is much less likely to cause legal hassles. Also, it's only fair that the person who wrote the article get a little traffic for his / her efforts.



damn u edited ur post u had clearly said that post full articles or dont post now u edited that  that was i pointing out to thats all ... im outta here got some wallpapers to post  peace


----------



## din (Dec 7, 2007)

iMav, please do not pretend that you didn't get it. This is what drgrudge, myself and all senior members here mentioned and finally clarified by FatBeing.



			
				FatBeing said:
			
		

> 2. You're more than welcome to cite your personal blogs as sources, if (*and only if*) you are the original creator of the content. I've updated the rules to this effect.
> 
> What this means is that members should navigate thus: Digit > Original source and not Digit > member blog > original source.



Please come back to the topic.


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 7, 2007)

iMav -Can you please point out where I edited? What I posted is still there for your inspection.


----------



## Cyrus_the_virus (Dec 7, 2007)

I thought all the arguments should have been cleared by the time Fatbeing explained things. But still everyone keeps arguing abt what happened. *gigasmilies.googlepages.com/66.gif

I think the thread should be locked and made a sticky to clear any such future confusion. *gigasmilies.googlepages.com/43.gif


----------



## anandk (Dec 10, 2007)

I think only Fatbeing has understood my problem in this case, when he said : "Avoid reproducing entire articles: depending on the source, it might be illegal to reproduce content in its entirety. Partial reproduction with a citation is much less likely to cause legal hassles". _Incidentally must repeat, Castlecops had no issues carrying 'this article' on its HomePage, as it appeared here; but some members/mods here did !_

Now take this news too:  *Microsoft launches new website to create Secure Passwords*. Its posted on my site. Saw it posted on Activewin Homepege  too, linking back to my site. So, whom do I link it to, if I were to post it? 

Several websites have no issues about carrying WinVistaClub link as source. Just think ! Why the fuss here? Because I am an old member and if the courtesy is accorded to me, shouldnt it be accorded to others too ? *The issue has to be the originality, timing and credibility.* 

Naturally since I am (?) an active member here, I post news here with my site as source, _IF I am among the first to break it and/or re-interpret it_. Where its just a copy-paste, I reproduce part of the article and link back to the source. That SHOULD be the way, imo.

And I never said I would be leaving the forum. All I said was that, I would not post 'NEW' threads in view of such controversies. Hope this clarifies the issue to those who emailed/im'd me  Thanx !

Let the issue pass by now ... 

Regards.


----------



## x3060 (Dec 10, 2007)

what a waist of a thread...., i see nothing but members saying guide lines , that too each having posted in excess of 1000.


am not saying it was bad for any, but if it was a doubt in the guidelines in the forum

POST it in another thread...why hijack this thread....any ways good to see all sttled here...it was time pass reading it ...

on topic....i use nod 32..and i am happy ...


----------



## fun2sh (Dec 10, 2007)

my goodness!yahan to Mahabharat chal raha tha! 
anyways,on topic
hey wat kind of thing avast failed? i use avast. Plz clarify. nahi to main nod par shift kar lunga.

waise i posted this question before too but it seems to got lost in this YUDDHA!


----------



## din (Dec 10, 2007)

I am extremely sorry, I know re-opening the closed issue is not at all a nice thing. But couldn't resist.

*Why you and iMav skipped the second point mentioned by FatBeing ? ? ? ?*


			
				FatBeing said:
			
		

> The "source" issue:
> 
> 2. You're more than welcome to cite your personal blogs as sources, if (*and only if*) you are the original creator of the content. I've updated the rules to this effect.
> 
> ...



Original creator - like you make a tutorial, or a review, or you want to tell us about some service, or you found some hidden feature in some software, anything but your own. But how come the virus test review / news is your own ? ?

Please read my post in the last page. Exactly same as what FatBeing mentioned. Hes right about the copyright issue. So you can post a small section of the article and can give link to the *original* source, or you can put the entire article (provided there is no copyright issue) and then put your blog / site as source. Whats the confusion in that ? Why thats is a bad idea ? ?

Now think about the rule. Why it is needed. Reason. Someone post a very useful info - for example - *IE has a very serious security issue, patch it as soon as possible - else your HDD will be formatted. More info here* - Imagine the 'more info here link' goes to some blog which has lot of google ads, banners and all stuff (which makes it difficult to find the news at all), then we find the news there, and that is not enough, it says, for more news, click here - goes to another site which has bit more details, again goes to MS site or the original news providers site, then finally to download the patch ! This example has nothing to do with your site, it is just an example, but there is a great chance that new members here will do it if no such rules are there. The rule helps the reader to get the content very fast and when its needed instead of all these blog -> site -> some other site -> news source -> patch site -> patch download, the long way.

Also, you mentioned you are having problem managing the bandwidth of your site, you never wanted to advertise your site etc, then why you are taking trouble ? ?

Regarding other sites, yes, they may be allowing the roundabout way of blog->site->another site etc etc, it is their policy. Digit forum want to help members more and want to help members to get info in the fastest and easiest way. So there is no logic in asking mods /admin, why it is not allowed here when it is allowed in xyz site. No one is against your site or blog, it is not a personal thing either. Your site is excellent, no doubt in that. The info, news or anything, all great.But the rule is same for all, and it is only for the goodness of this forum.

And go through the rules, it says, when an old/senior member commit a mistake it is more serious !! Reason is, new members look at senior member's post for guidance, rules and style.

Finally, iMav's partial quote of FatBeing never surprised me as I know how immature some of his posts are, but when you also quoted partially, I am really surprised 

Finally, no need to feel bad on this. I am not against you  or any other member here. I had very heated fight in some threads against MS, gx, iMav and many other members got angry on those. But thats all about forum, just like iMav always says, we are all great friends outside the forum.  I remember posting a total crap thread about iPhone. After seeing the response from other members, I straightaway deleted teh thread and apologized to all members. Mistakes - it happens, afterall we are all humans 

Forget it all man, lets come back to Digit forum, in every section. We just can't miss yah


----------



## iMav (Dec 10, 2007)

man i love this forum


----------



## x3060 (Dec 10, 2007)

@din.....ente ponnu mashe, enthuttokkaya evedey nadakunney....

chumma adipidi caselonnum eduthu chadenda, mattullavar thammi thalli chakettae , namukkentha kariyam..

@fun2sh...join the NOD club....


----------



## din (Dec 10, 2007)

@x3060

Sorry yaar, chilappo njanum immature aayiponu  My fault. Ini sure aayittum sookshikkum. Issue close chythu


----------



## x3060 (Dec 10, 2007)

@din...kollaamm nalla kariyam


----------



## fun2sh (Dec 10, 2007)

are bhai log chattin karna hai to pm kiya karo na... n yeah i hav got best solution for these flame wars... USE PM OPTION N EK DOOSRE KO JITNA GALI DENA HAI DO!! why to always divert a theard from topic!!


@ontopic
some body tel wat kind of test this avast failed n does this VB100 virus test thingy matter MUCH


----------



## blackpearl (Dec 10, 2007)

din said:
			
		

> Original creator - like you make a tutorial, or a review, or you want to tell us about some service, or you found some hidden feature in some software, anything but your own. But how come the virus test review / news is your own ? ?
> 
> Please read my post in the last page. Exactly same as what FatBeing mentioned. Hes right about the copyright issue. So you can post a small section of the article and can give link to the *original* source, or you can put the entire article (provided there is no copyright issue) and then put your blog / site as source. Whats the confusion in that ? Why thats is a bad idea ? ?
> 
> Now think about the rule. Why it is needed. Reason. Someone post a very useful info - for example - *IE has a very serious security issue, patch it as soon as possible - else your HDD will be formatted. More info here* - Imagine the 'more info here link' goes to some blog which has lot of google ads, banners and all stuff (which makes it difficult to find the news at all), then we find the news there, and that is not enough, it says, for more news, click here - goes to another site which has bit more details, again goes to MS site or the original news providers site, then finally to download the patch ! This example has nothing to do with your site, it is just an example, but there is a great chance that new members here will do it if no such rules are there. The rule helps the reader to get the content very fast and when its needed instead of all these blog -> site -> some other site -> news source -> patch site -> patch download, the long way.



I agree with din. Original creator means when you have written it yourself. News items can never be "original". When you copy paste stuff from other sites and post it in your blog, you should give the link to the original source not yout blog. It's as simple as that. I don't know why some members are finding it so difficult to accept.


----------



## iMav (Dec 10, 2007)

i think we can put the source issue to rest; anand has edited and added the other source and it is difficult for me or anand to get the point across so read the news if u like it be happy if u dont - close ur browser call ur parents (call ur girl friend if u want to) talk to them or take ur children out for dinner that will be more satisfying than arguing over what source to put


----------



## din (Dec 10, 2007)

@blackpearl

As I mentioned many times, there is no use in trying to wake up someone whos pretending they are sleeping ! They know what me, drgrudge, FatBeing and all other members mentioned and explained. It is very simple but they just pretend they do not understand lol

And check the first post, the thread starting person added the second link (after drgrudge's and FatBeings warnings) to make the roundabout  way even more longer.

It was digit -> his blog -> original site -> news

When he added the second source, it is now

digit -> some other site with his post -> his blog -> original site -> news

LOL !!!


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Dec 10, 2007)

^^heh.

fatbeing is absolutely right---if you have written the article yourself then you have every right to give link to your blog\site\whatever,but if you have copy pasted that then you ought to give the original link.

I thought this issue wass resolved a few days back by fatty.lol.Some things never die.


----------



## iMav (Dec 10, 2007)

dino sir what ur pointing out to is right as i said earlier plagrism and site ads arent right im against them but this particular issue is an exception which u need to consider thats all im saying and why i brought grudgy's name was cause he clearly stated that either post full articles or dont post at all which to me came rather as a surprising statement from 1 senior member to another  trust me dino sir this particular case is an exception  most ppl know VB site in this case if u follow he links u end up at a login page and anand collated the results himself the results of the test were for every 1 to see but anand brought out the fact that MS topped them thats what im saying and not that the source should be put or 1 should be allowed to put his blogs as source this particular case has to be considered differently painting everything with the same brush is not right and fatty pointed the same thru point 1 which was refering to this particular case  as i said lets put this case to rest


----------



## din (Dec 10, 2007)

Giving all respect to *Anand* for postint this first ...



			
				fun2sh said:
			
		

> hey wat kind of thing avast failed? i use avast. Plz clarify. nahi to main nod par shift kar lunga.



The source (virusbtn.com) says - Failure reason: 1 false positives - for Avast.

Also some result history - from 1998 to 2007

Symantec - 41 Success / 6 Failure / 8 No Entry

Microsoft Forefront - 3 Success / 0 Failure / 52 No Entry

Avast - 24 Success / 20 Failure / 11 No Entry

Kaspersky - 40 Success / 15 Failure / 0 No Entry

F-Secure - 27 Success / 13 Failure / 15 No Entry

McAfee - 27 Success / 13 Failure / 15 No Entry

Microsoft OneCare - 2 Success / 1 Failure / 52 No Entry

Saw an old thread in between !

How they test - Here


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Dec 10, 2007)

this means avast din't fail actually but just showed an false positive.And may I ask who actually believes the reliability of such tests?(please don't answer it,some questions are best left unanswered)


----------



## din (Dec 10, 2007)

Aaaw

I forgot to post the top one

47 Success / 3 Failure / 5 No Entry

Guess who ? Eset aka NOD32 - passed in last test too.


----------



## iMav (Dec 10, 2007)

which means my avast is actually more sensitive and wud give me a warning if theres no virus also


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Dec 10, 2007)

^^lol.yep.and the main reason is it is free!!!so you can't really complain.nod32 and kespersky et al which costs a lot are no better than avast the free one.lol.


----------



## din (Dec 10, 2007)

VB100 test - Windows Vista Business Edition - February 2007

Alwil (Avast)	Status: PASS

CA Home	Status: PASS

CA eTrust Status: PASS

CAT QuickHeal	Status: PASS

Eset Status: PASS

Fortinet Status: PASS

F-Secure Status: PASS

GDATA 	Status: FAIL
Failure reason: NaN wildlist misses

Grisoft Status: PASS

Kaspersky  Status: PASS

McAfee	Status: FAIL
Failure reason: NaN wildlist misses

Microsoft OneCare Status: FAIL
Failure reason: NaN wildlist misses

Norman 	Status: FAIL
Failure reason: NaN wildlist misses

Sophos 	Status: PASS

Symantec Status: PASS

Source - same (virusbtn.com)


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 10, 2007)

I don't believe in any AV tests. IMHO the user is the best judge!


----------



## din (Dec 10, 2007)

@infra_red_dude

I agree with you in that case. Using Symantec for quite some time. I think the money we paid for that was worth. Never had any serious issues so far. May be it depends on user. Some others may see Symantec having problem.


----------



## fun2sh (Dec 10, 2007)

thanks for the info.!! avast always rocks!!


----------



## blackpearl (Dec 11, 2007)

Quick Heal passed??

Fake!!


----------

