Opinions wanted on Dr. Solomon's Anti-Virus Toolkit

Opinions wanted on Dr. Solomon's Anti-Virus Toolkit

Post by Rogpr » Fri, 30 Apr 1999 04:00:00



Hello,

I use Dr Solmon's for OS/2 and it seems to work very well - but I've never had
an OS/2 virus to really test it!   I also use the win and dos versions at work,
where we have had several virus attacks, and Dr Solmon's has always sorted the
problem quickly and effectively. In magazine comparison tests Dr Solomon's has
always been at or near the top.

Regards

Roger Provins
Gloucester

 
 
 

Opinions wanted on Dr. Solomon's Anti-Virus Toolkit

Post by John Mandevill » Fri, 30 Apr 1999 04:00:00



> Does anyone here use Dr. Solomon's Anti-Virus Toolkit for OS/2?  If so, could
> you please give me your opinion of it, in terms of:

> 1. How good is it compared to other OS/2 anti-virus products.
> 2. How good of an anti-virus product is it?
> 3. How good of an OS/2 application is it?

> Does it have a command-line interface?  I'd like to be able to use it from
> Rexx scripts.

3. I use it here, and it seems to work well.  I've only used it as a
scanner and not as a background watchdog.  It does have both a PM and
cammand-line interface.  The "Virus Encyclopedia" of the OS/2 version
appears to be somewhat out of date.  However, the the anti-virus engine
is the same as for the Windows product.  It will not bowl you over as a
great OS/2 product you can use to show off what a great user interface
OS/2 has.  However, that is not something I look for in an antivirus
product.  It does what it's supposed to do and appears to do it
flawlessly.

2.  It has always had a good reputation as one of the best antivirus
products around.  I'm not an anti-virus expert, but it appears to have a
good reputation among anti-virus experts.

1.  I don't know.  The only other OS/2 anti-virus product I've used is
McAfee which appears to be generally regarded as a mediocre anti-virus
product.

Dr. Solomon was purchased by Network Associates (McAfee's parent) maybe
about a year ago.  I suspect that this is a bad sign, though probably
not as bad a sign as IBM AV being purchased by Symantec.  For now, I'm
taking an "If it ain't broke (yet), don't fix it (yet)" approach.

There are two other possibilities worth looking into.

  F-prot.  See http://www.commandcom.com/html/products/fprot.html
  I believe this is (or at least was) supposed to be somewhat weak on
one
  type of virus (IIRC, polymorphic viruses) but otherwise has an very
good
  anti-virus reputation.  I think that it's orginater is supposed to be
one
  of the big heros of the anti-virus field.  I haven't tried the OS/2
version.

  F-secure.  See http://www.datafellows.com/anit-virus/prodinfo/
  This supposedly combines the anti-virus engines of F-prot (see above)
and AVP.
  AVP has an excellent anti-virus reputation.  I used to use an old DOS
version of
  AVP (and of F-prot), but have not tried this DataFellows combined
incarnation.

The old DOS versions of f-prot and AVP had command line versions.  I
don't knonw whether current OS/2 versions of F-prot or F-secure do.

--
"The actual user of the PC -- someone who can do anything they want --
is the enemy." -- David Aucsmith, Intel Corporation
Source: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/p3/0,6424,2216772,00.html
See also: http://www.privacy.org/bigbrogerinside/

John Mandeville


 
 
 

Opinions wanted on Dr. Solomon's Anti-Virus Toolkit

Post by Timur Tab » Sat, 01 May 1999 04:00:00



>3. I use it here, and it seems to work well.  I've only used it as a
>scanner and not as a background watchdog.  It does have both a PM and
>cammand-line interface.  The "Virus Encyclopedia" of the OS/2 version
>appears to be somewhat out of date.

What is the "Virus Encyclopedia"?  Last I heard there are only 3 native OS/2
virii, but I've never seen any of them nor have I ever heard of anyone being
infected by any of them.

--
Remove "nospam_" from my email address when replying


OS/2 page: http://www.os2ss.com/Information/Newusers/index.html
OS/2 Programming page: http://www.edm2.com/common/links.html
Looking for the best OS/2 soundcard? http://www.tabi.org/timur/crystalos2.html

 
 
 

Opinions wanted on Dr. Solomon's Anti-Virus Toolkit

Post by John Mandevill » Wed, 05 May 1999 04:00:00




> >3. I use it here, and it seems to work well.  I've only used it as a
> >scanner and not as a background watchdog.  It does have both a PM and
> >cammand-line interface.  The "Virus Encyclopedia" of the OS/2 version
> >appears to be somewhat out of date.

> What is the "Virus Encyclopedia"?  Last I heard there are only 3 native OS/2
> virii, but I've never seen any of them nor have I ever heard of anyone being
> infected by any of them.

It's all or mostly DOS/WIN virii.  You obviously don't need all of this
if you're only interested in OS/2 virii.  There are reasons an OS/2 user
might be interested in DOS/WIN virii.  1. You're the guy they call when
someone else's computer gets infected.  2. You sometimes boot into other
OS's.  3 You set PROTECTONLY=NO.  4. You accidently boot your OS/2
computer with an infected floppy in the drive--if it's a boot sector
virus, the disk doen't have to be bootable to infect you.  5. The big
one: People insist on giving you MS Word and Excel documents.

--
"The actual user of the PC -- someone who can do anything they want --
is the enemy." -- David Aucsmith, Intel Corporation
Source: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/p3/0,6424,2216772,00.html
See also: http://www.privacy.org/bigbrogerinside/

John Mandeville

 
 
 

Opinions wanted on Dr. Solomon's Anti-Virus Toolkit

Post by John Mandevill » Fri, 07 May 1999 04:00:00





> > >3. I use it here, and it seems to work well.  I've only used it as a
> > >scanner and not as a background watchdog.  It does have both a PM and
> > >cammand-line interface.  The "Virus Encyclopedia" of the OS/2 version
> > >appears to be somewhat out of date.

> > What is the "Virus Encyclopedia"?  Last I heard there are only 3 native OS/2
> > virii, but I've never seen any of them nor have I ever heard of anyone being
> > infected by any of them.

> It's all or mostly DOS/WIN virii.  You obviously don't need all of this
> if you're only interested in OS/2 virii.  ....

Sorry for replying to my own message.  It occurs to me I probably
misunderstood Timur's question.  The Virus Encyclopedia is not the
database of virus strings used for scaning, repairing, etc.  For that,
the OS/2 version (at least appears to) use the same information as the
Windows version.  Rather, the Virus Encyclopedia is something for the
user to look up information about a particular virus (what kind of virus
it is, how much damage the virus does, how prevelent is it, etc.)  The
Windows 95 version delivers it as a Windows 95 help file.  The OS/2
version needs its own reader (supplied as part of the software package).

--
"The actual user of the PC -- someone who can do anything they want --
is the enemy." -- David Aucsmith, Intel Corporation
Source: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/p3/0,6424,2216772,00.html
See also: http://www.privacy.org/bigbrogerinside/

John Mandeville