🚀 go-pugleaf

"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.