🚀 go-pugleaf

"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message 
news:j7t3665drnnvo6j1epdv7an546mbcs7d8u@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:44:55 -0400, in
> <i3srqb$fkc$1@news.eternal-september.org>, "FromTheRafters"
> <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>
>>"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>>news:3dp2669is92a9f58ai7nih728pi8164jpf@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 07:45:46 -0400, in
>>> <i3re5e$jkc$1@news.eternal-september.org>, "FromTheRafters"
>>> <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:utd1665r4ab04coghfdir9rsn06cc3f5m8@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 20:39:32 -0400, in
>>>>> <i3q747$ago$1@news.eternal-september.org>, "FromTheRafters"
>>>>> <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:8a5166l8harrijvc3lh42u24s9h0b8r01h@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought "this class of virus" would be specific enough,
>>>>>>> but you're right that I should have been clearer,
>>>>>>> and I thank you for the clarification.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Just curious, what did you mean by 'this class of virus' and the
>>>>>>infection of possibly needed executables?
>>>>>
>>>>> I meant the class of virus that implants its own executable files,
>>>>> and protects them from most methods of removal.  Sorry for not 
>>>>> being
>>>>> more clear.
>>>>
>>>>That's okay. You are correct that self-contained replicator files 
>>>>can
>>>>be
>>>>deleted outright - there is nothing there that needs to be salvaged,
>>>>but
>>>>Ramnit.a actually modifies (infects/trojanizes) preexisting program
>>>>files (although not with a replicant).
>>>
>>> That depends on the actual problem, what the anti-virus system is or
>>> is
>>> not able to remove and disinfect on its own.  According to this
>>> report:
>>> <http://www.threatexpert.com/report.aspx?md5=074a688443faea25c2589975069de044>
>>> Win32/RAMNIT.A modifies few essential executables.  My own 
>>> experience
>>> with Microsoft Security Essentials (cf OP) is that only 
>>> non-essential
>>> files are missed in this case.  Do you have experience to the
>>> contrary?
>>
>>No, but I think I understand what you are saying now.
>
> I understood what I was saying in the first post, thank you very much.

Oh, that's rich. The old "I knew what I meant".

Unfortunately, some users might consider some non-essential files as 
needed files and they don't always have backups of them. Your stated 
method does nothing to retain or recover them.