Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33

Thread: win32.isbar.450

  1. #21
    hanging Guest

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450

    I deleted this trojan as advised by Zone Alarm, and it appeared to have some relationship with AOL.

    Is there any means by which I can get this back, since it appears to be a "false positive"???

    PLEASE HELP

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    9,057

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450

    Re-install the AOL media player, again. Then reboot. Then scan with the ZA and make sure all detected is quarentined. Once the scanner detects it again and has in it's quarentine, then set the scanner to omit and release. The next scan will noy detect this paticular file and always omit it.

    Cheers,

    Oldsod
    Best regards.
    oldsod

  3. #23
    bonson Guest

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450

    I had this same problem, except none of these symptoms posted are similar to mine. I dont have AOL, and it infected two of my computers on the same day/

    First time i got this trojan, i had left both of my computers on over night, i have zone alarms pro installed on both computers, (one being a laptop, and the other being a desktop), i did a scan in the morning, and found the win32.isbar.450 trojan on my laptop, deleted it, re-formated my comp, then re-installed zone alarms pro again, and some how that trojan came back.

    As if thats not weird enough, i then scanned my desktop computer and also found the exact same trojan, "win32.isbar.450". Right now im worrying if it has some how infected my modem, how else could it get too both of my computers.

    Anyways heres what ZA scan details said.

    http://img455.imageshack.us/img455/1821/keylog1nv5.png

  4. #24
    tbear Guest

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450

    <blockquote><hr>Oldsod wrote:
    Hi Arali and Stroye

    . . .Ir is a very good suggestion to do an online scan- with the resident AntiVirus turned off and also doing the online scan using the Internet Explorer (they all use a &quot;safe&quot; activeX).

    Two suggestions are;

    http://www.**bleep**.com/scan8/ie.html

    http://us.mcafee.com/root/mfs/default.asp?affid=294



    Cheers,
    Oldsod
    <hr></blockquote>


    I would add Kaspersky's on line virus scanner to your list (http://usa.kaspersky.com/products_se...us-scanner.php). After about two decades using McAfee, we're switching to Kaspersky as our subscriptions expire. K among the best AV out there, running neck and neck with Node32.

    That said, it appears that ZA has yet again registered another false postive with isbar.450. (It showed up on one of our machines.)

  5. #25
    tbear Guest

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450

    <blockquote><hr>Stroye wrote:
    Just had this Trojan flagged up on my latest Anti-spyware scan today. DAT file version 01.200707.2035
    I believe that in my case this is a False Positive. I accepted to quarantine it, only after, to find it only concerns a Nullsoft ActiveX component, and a WinAmp dll file called AmpX.dll, of which quarantining deletes.
    <hr></blockquote>


    Including this one, I believe we've had at least 3 false positives in the last three months or so. I have been a staunch supporter of ZA for years and continue to be so. However, my confidence in ZA's spyware component continues to decline. (I've used AdAware and Spybot for several years and have yet to have a single false positive).

    Following the ZA alert, I ran a full McAfee scan on the suspect machine (that one still has an active McAfee AV subscription). Nothing. That was followed by Spybot and AdAware scans. Also nothing. Following confirmation that there's nothing there, and because of the repeated false positives, I tell ZA to &quot;skip once&quot; so I can monitor how long it will take before they correct the problem.

  6. #26
    stroye Guest

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450


    <blockquote>TBear wrote:
    <blockquote><hr>
    Including this one, I believe we've had at least 3 false positives in the last three months or so. I have been a staunch supporter of ZA for years and continue to be so. However, my confidence in ZA's spyware component continues to decline. (I've used AdAware and Spybot for several years and have yet to have a single false positive).

    <hr></blockquote></blockquote>




    Following on from your thoughts TBear, perhaps it might be better for us, if we retrain our initial reactions to any flagged Spyware, Trojans etc, to that of assuming a False Positive ... until proved otherwise? Then there will be... Less alarm with ZoneAlarm!
    I think, for the user, a more measured response to these alerts is the only way to deal with them.

    Stroye

  7. #27
    tbear Guest

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450

    <blockquote><hr>Stroye wrote:

    <blockquote>TBear wrote:
    <blockquote><hr>
    Including this one, I believe we've had at least 3 false positives in the last three months or so. I have been a staunch supporter of ZA for years and continue to be so. However, my confidence in ZA's spyware component continues to decline. (I've used AdAware and Spybot for several years and have yet to have a single false positive).

    <hr></blockquote></blockquote>




    Following on from your thoughts TBear, perhaps it might be better for us, if we retrain our initial reactions to any flagged Spyware, Trojans etc, to that of assuming a False Positive ... until proved otherwise? Then there will be... Less alarm with ZoneAlarm!
    I think, for the user, a more measured response to these alerts is the only way to deal with them.

    Stroye

    <hr></blockquote>


    Thanks for your comments, Stroye.

    I would add one major caveat, the one implied in my previous post: Before you have ZA mark the potential offender/false positive as &quot;skip once&quot; so you can monitor it daily, at the very least be sure to run your AV against it. I would also recommend running at least one other anti-malware/spyware program (AdAware and Spybot are both free for individuals).

  8. #28
    bonson Guest

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450

    Sorry to sound stupid, but can someone tell me what a &quot;false positive&quot; means?

  9. #29
    tbear Guest

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450

    <blockquote><hr>Bonson wrote:
    Sorry to sound stupid, but can someone tell me what a &quot;false positive&quot; means?
    <hr></blockquote>


    There's no such thing as a stupid question. Always ask if you're not sure! so dere :-)

    In our context, a &quot;false positive&quot; occurs when ZA incorrectly identifies a file as a threat. In this case ZA appears to be incorrectly identifying a legitimate file from AOL as malware.

  10. #30
    tupaia Guest

    Default Re: win32.isbar.450

    I agree.
    The number of false positives during the past SIX months is unacceptable in my experience, compared to other products.
    I've complained to ZA, to no effect.
    There is too much time wasted trying to find out if an alert is real or not.
    I have turned off ZA's Pro's spyware &quot;solution&quot;
    and substituted Spy Sweeper.
    No more false positives!!

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •