ratzan@rwja.umdnj.edu (Lee Ratzan) (01/18/91)
There is some discussion here about the relative merits of Disinfectant 2.4 versus Virex 1.3 . Apart from issues of personal taste which supplies a greater range of protection? For example, is Virex effective against WDEF? Are there viri (a/k/a viruses) which are detected by one but not the other? (For the record D 2.4 is circa Fall 1990, V 1.3 is circa 1989). Any information would be most helpful! Lee Ratzan Univ of Medicine/Dentistry of NJ Rm S-B11/ Dpt IST 675 Hoes Lane Piscataway, NJ 08854
CAH0@gte.com (Chuck Hoffman) (01/23/91)
ratzan@rwja.umdnj.edu (Lee Ratzan) writes: > There is some discussion here about the relative merits of > Disinfectant 2.4 versus Virex 1.3 . I currently run Disinfectant 2.4 and Virex 2.84. I have run both products for about a year and a half. I can't tell you what the first release was of each which I ran. Both John Norstadt (Disinfectant) and Microcom (Virex) do an excellent job of providing updates soon after we seen reports of new viruses. Virex meets my needs, and I run Disinfectant because I can do so for no additional cost, and a few times Disinfectant has been first with protections against a new virus. In the past, John Norstadt has written well of Virex. - - Chuck Hoffman, GTE Laboratories, Inc. | I'm not sure why we're here, cah0@bunny.gte.com | but I am sure that while we're Telephone (U.S.A.) 617-466-2131 | here, we're supposed to help GTE VoiceNet: 679-2131 | each other. GTE Telemail: C.HOFFMAN |
lev@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Brian S. Lev) (01/23/91)
Hi, all... I was "volunteered" to handle Mac "security" (read: virus protection) here at Goddard roughly a year ago, and after some research and consultation with a number of local gurus decided to throw in my lot with Disinfectant. Admittedly the primary reason was that it was FREE (and it worked!), so there were no problems with licensing X copies. I just wanted to add my 2 cents' worth to RD Francis' message... >As far as I know, from the standpoint of reliability, both products >are completely reliable. Ditto here -- if I put a disk into a Mac with either one of these programs (assuming Virex has been updated!), I feel confident that it's safe. > The only differences visible to the user are >minor cosmetic differences in implementing the interface, the >commercial vs. PD issue, and the cost. One other factor: in general, I find Disinfectant less "obtrusive", in that the scan is fast and silent, and you don't have to worry about interruptions unless you *need* one, i.e., to tell you a file's been infected. > By commercial vs. PD, I mean >that some people would prefer to use a commercial product >that they have to pay to get upgrades for because that prodcut's >creators are more motivated to keep the program up-to-date, and less >likely to drop support. Personally, I recommend Disinfectant; John >Norstad's done a great job, his updates are usually the first I hear >of the existance of a new Mac virus, and his support for the product >has been wonderful. I will heartily second that! Again, I'm not out to "plug" any product, and I feel equally confident about the safety of my files with either Virex OR Disin- fectant, but the upgrades to the latter 1) come faster, 2) are more readily available, 3) are trustworthy, 4) THEY WORK, and 5) don't cost diddly squat beyond your network connection (or a blank floppy if you get it from someone). Here at Goddard, I now distribute what's called "MacSecure" (now at vers. 3.0). It's a single (800K) floppy containing Disinfectant (the most recent version available, as soon as we're able to lay hands on it), a reallllly good Hyper- Card stack put together by Joe McMahon (one of my colleagues here) that tells you all kinds of good stuff about viruses, how they work, how to "kill" them, and reviews virus fighters, and a smaller "MacHelper" stack that I threw together to give hints & tips and explain what some of those ugly Sad Macs and Mac Bombs mean... I know that an unfortunate number of users ignore and/or discard the HyperCard stacks, but Disinfectant continually gathers raves from MacSecure users -- and that now includes several NASA centers, a number of NASA-affiliated contractors, several local computer sites... and after a series of VERY unexpected phone calls, the (then-known-as) Operation Desert Shield! Again, Virex *is* good stuff -- but thank you thank you thank you John Norstad! +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Brian Lev/STX (301)286-9514 (FTS)888-9514 | | NASA Goddard Space Flight Center DECnet: SDCDCL::LEV (6153::LEV) | | Advanced Data Flow Technology Office TCP/IP: lev@dftnic.gsfc.nasa.gov | | Code 930.4 BITNET: LEV@DFTBIT | | Greenbelt, MD 20771 TELENET: [BLEV/GSFCMAIL] | | X.400 Address: (C:USA,ADMD:TELEMAIL,PRMD:GSFC,O:GSFCMAIL,UN:BLEV) | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | "The ability of a network to knit together the members of a sprawling | | community has proved to be the most powerful way of fostering scienti- | | fic advancement yet discovered." -- Peter Denning | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | DISCLAIMER: THESE STATEMENTS ARE MY OWN AND *NOT* NASA'S OR STX'S! | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
gsb1@forth.stirling.ac.uk (Mr Gordon S Byron) (01/28/91)
how do you rate SAM 6 in relation to the two under discussion. curious as we've recently got a site license for it. Wnat to know if we've been silly. ******************************************************************************* Snailmail: Gordon Byron, Arts Computing Advisor,Pathfoot Building, University of Stirling,FK9 4LA Stirling, Scotland, UK. Voice: Phone: 0786 73171: Ext 7266 FAX +78651335 *******************************************************************************