Thread: [Dev-C++] virus problem? Adsincontext

List,

I'm having a bit of a puzzling day.  I was told by my ISP that I needed 
to run  a spyware check to try to resolve a connection problem I'm 
having.  After running the check using Spyware Doctor (one of the ones 
that they suggest will do a good job) it returns that seven .def files 
in DEV-C++ are files associated with Adsincontext spyware.  This didn't 
make much sense to me since the files to remove as per a Google search 
suggest would be responsible for such an infection don't exist.

Can anyone help me on this.  I'm confident that I didn't get a virus or 
spyware infecting DEV-C++, but just want a bit or reassurance.

Sincerely,
Kevin Huyck.

Sorry there - forgot to change it to DevC++ users group (wasn't
thinking again ;)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: lordSauron <lor...@gm...>
Date: Jul 25, 2005 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] virus problem? Adsincontext
To: TornadoChaser <kb...@gm...>


Google Microsoft AntiSpyware, which is basically the best for
anti-spyware/adware operations.  Since it was made by the morons who
made windows, it's really good at cleaning up Windows' many
magnificent messes.  It's never incorrectly reported a threat at any
time.

Eh. I'd be careful about Microsoft AntiSpyware.

If you truely want a whack-all combination, here's what you need.

Ad-Aware from LavaSoft
SpyBot
HijackThis (helps kill anything that's hooked IE, used for removing
those pesky integrated spyware programs)

Never once in the 2-3 years of using it have I found a piece of
spyware that they can't collectively destroy.

On 7/25/05, lordSauron <lor...@gm...> wrote:
> Sorry there - forgot to change it to DevC++ users group (wasn't
> thinking again ;)
>=20
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: lordSauron <lor...@gm...>
> Date: Jul 25, 2005 10:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] virus problem? Adsincontext
> To: TornadoChaser <kb...@gm...>
>=20
>=20
> Google Microsoft AntiSpyware, which is basically the best for
> anti-spyware/adware operations.  Since it was made by the morons who
> made windows, it's really good at cleaning up Windows' many
> magnificent messes.  It's never incorrectly reported a threat at any
> time.
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id=16492&opclick
> _______________________________________________
> Dev-cpp-users mailing list
> Dev...@li...
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys/devcpp/ub.htm
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dev-cpp-users
>=20


--=20
Darsant Silverstring=20

"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding."
-Albert Einstein

I definitely recommend Ad-Aware and Spybot Search & Destroy. Together they
form a very, very strong team!

/Per W

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005, Josh McFarlane wrote:

> Eh. I'd be careful about Microsoft AntiSpyware.
>
> If you truely want a whack-all combination, here's what you need.
>
> Ad-Aware from LavaSoft
> SpyBot
> HijackThis (helps kill anything that's hooked IE, used for removing
> those pesky integrated spyware programs)
>
> Never once in the 2-3 years of using it have I found a piece of
> spyware that they can't collectively destroy.
>
> On 7/25/05, lordSauron <lor...@gm...> wrote:
> > Sorry there - forgot to change it to DevC++ users group (wasn't
> > thinking again ;)
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: lordSauron <lor...@gm...>
> > Date: Jul 25, 2005 10:44 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] virus problem? Adsincontext
> > To: TornadoChaser <kb...@gm...>
> >
> >
> > Google Microsoft AntiSpyware, which is basically the best for
> > anti-spyware/adware operations.  Since it was made by the morons who
> > made windows, it's really good at cleaning up Windows' many
> > magnificent messes.  It's never incorrectly reported a threat at any
> > time.

Hi All,
 
As an IT support person, I've found some very resilient infestations that both of the first spy-ware removal applications couldn't get out stand-alone.  One I did a few months back required rebooting in console safe mode and manually removing them.  It can be much harder on NTFS if you normally operate as administrator rather than as a user.  This is because they create a process that can't be removed while the process is executing and further create a restart 'process' that restarts the spy-ware process if you terminate it via Task Manager.  This is why I love nix!
 
I will swear by Ad-Aware and Spybot, however, and can attest to their functionality and effectiveness.  I've never used HijackThis however.

Josh McFarlane <da...@gm...> wrote:
Eh. I'd be careful about Microsoft AntiSpyware.

If you truely want a whack-all combination, here's what you need.

Ad-Aware from LavaSoft
SpyBot
HijackThis (helps kill anything that's hooked IE, used for removing
those pesky integrated spyware programs)

Never once in the 2-3 years of using it have I found a piece of
spyware that they can't collectively destroy.

On 7/25/05, lordSauron wrote:
> Sorry there - forgot to change it to DevC++ users group (wasn't
> thinking again ;)
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: lordSauron 
> Date: Jul 25, 2005 10:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] virus problem? Adsincontext
> To: TornadoChaser 
> 
> 
> Google Microsoft AntiSpyware, which is basically the best for
> anti-spyware/adware operations. Since it was made by the morons who
> made windows, it's really good at cleaning up Windows' many
> magnificent messes. It's never incorrectly reported a threat at any
> time.
<snip>



Alfred P. Reaud
 

Thanks Josh and LordSauron, but I think that you both kinda missed my 
question, which may have been hard to descern.  Has anyone ever had any 
reports of spyware EXCLUSIVELY in the DEV-C++ directories?  That's where 
it's saying that my spyware is located and that's the only place.

Kevin.

Josh McFarlane wrote:

>Eh. I'd be careful about Microsoft AntiSpyware.
>
>If you truely want a whack-all combination, here's what you need.
>
>Ad-Aware from LavaSoft
>SpyBot
>HijackThis (helps kill anything that's hooked IE, used for removing
>those pesky integrated spyware programs)
>
>Never once in the 2-3 years of using it have I found a piece of
>spyware that they can't collectively destroy.
>
>On 7/25/05, lordSauron <lor...@gm...> wrote:
>  
>
>>Sorry there - forgot to change it to DevC++ users group (wasn't
>>thinking again ;)
>>
>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>From: lordSauron <lor...@gm...>
>>Date: Jul 25, 2005 10:44 AM
>>Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] virus problem? Adsincontext
>>To: TornadoChaser <kb...@gm...>
>>
>>
>>Google Microsoft AntiSpyware, which is basically the best for
>>anti-spyware/adware operations.  Since it was made by the morons who
>>made windows, it's really good at cleaning up Windows' many
>>magnificent messes.  It's never incorrectly reported a threat at any
>>time.
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&opclick
>>_______________________________________________
>>Dev-cpp-users mailing list
>>Dev...@li...
>>TO UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys/devcpp/ub.htm
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dev-cpp-users
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>

On 7/25/05, TornadoChaser <kb...@gm...> wrote:
> Thanks Josh and LordSauron, but I think that you both kinda missed my
> question, which may have been hard to descern.  Has anyone ever had any
> reports of spyware EXCLUSIVELY in the DEV-C++ directories?  That's where
> it's saying that my spyware is located and that's the only place.
>=20
> Kevin.
I'd be iffy to trust Spyware Doctor. The software feels very...
spammish to me. It's probably a false positive. Companies tend to
proclaim "registery mechanics" and "privacy guardians" tend to be of
lower quality, as they're out to capitalize on the spyware scare.

Ad-Aware / Spybot both offer free downloads, and almost never give
false positives (I've personally never had a false positive, but it's
possible someone else has.)

However, I do enjoy some of the listings in their infections database.
"This is completely undetectable, yet we can find it and remove it!"
Bwaha. Suuuree it's undetectable.

--=20
Josh McFarlane
"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding."
-Albert Einstein

back on topic, no I have NEVER heard of ANY type of Virus, Spyware, or
Adware that DELIBERATELY infects DevC++ areas.

It's possible that your stuff was indeed infected randomly, since some
things do pick random folders to infect...  Email me the replacement,
uninfected files you need and I can attach them to an email so you can
replace them.

If you don't want to do that, then reinstall over your current installation=
.

I've never had any report from any spyware removal or anti-virus application that indicates that any Dev-C++ file or folder contains viruses or spy-ware.

lordSauron <lor...@gm...> wrote:back on topic, no I have NEVER heard of ANY type of Virus, Spyware, or
Adware that DELIBERATELY infects DevC++ areas.

It's possible that your stuff was indeed infected randomly, since some
things do pick random folders to infect... Email me the replacement,
uninfected files you need and I can attach them to an email so you can
replace them.

If you don't want to do that, then reinstall over your current installation.
<snip>



Alfred P. Reaud
 

Dear All Dev C++ users

Does anyone know how to speed up the 
compilation process of Dev-C++?
I'm running Win98 with a Celeron 1Gig machine. 64 Meg RAM.

Previously I had Dev-C++ version 4 and
then yesterday I downloaded the latest version
of Dev-C++ Bloodshed...and the compilation
process takes a long time compared to the
previous version.
Any tips to speed things up a bit?

I remember my DOS days and Turbo C++ when
compilation was a zip! 

Thanks in advance (I hope).

regards
Frankie Kam
Coordinator SOCS SCM
www.stamford.edu.my/socsscm
012-6585109 (h/p)
06-2822613 ext-108 (o)
06-2821403 (fax)
For important emails kindly
C.C. to ka...@st...
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "TornadoChaser" <kb...@gm...>
To: <dev...@li...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 1:26 AM
Subject: [Dev-C++] virus problem? Adsincontext


> List,
> 
> I'm having a bit of a puzzling day.  I was told by my ISP that I needed 
> to run  a spyware check to try to resolve a connection problem I'm 
> having.  After running the check using Spyware Doctor (one of the ones 
> that they suggest will do a good job) it returns that seven .def files 
> in DEV-C++ are files associated with Adsincontext spyware.  This didn't 
> make much sense to me since the files to remove as per a Google search 
> suggest would be responsible for such an infection don't exist.
> 
> Can anyone help me on this.  I'm confident that I didn't get a virus or 
> spyware infecting DEV-C++, but just want a bit or reassurance.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Kevin Huyck.
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Dev-cpp-users mailing list
> Dev...@li...
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys/devcpp/ub.htm
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dev-cpp-users

How is your memory utilization during compilations? 64MB is a bit on the
low side, even if Win98 is your absolute best bet to keep down on memory
spent by the OS.

/Per W

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Frankie Kam wrote:

> Dear All Dev C++ users
>
> Does anyone know how to speed up the
> compilation process of Dev-C++?
> I'm running Win98 with a Celeron 1Gig machine. 64 Meg RAM.
>
> Previously I had Dev-C++ version 4 and
> then yesterday I downloaded the latest version
> of Dev-C++ Bloodshed...and the compilation
> process takes a long time compared to the
> previous version.
> Any tips to speed things up a bit?
>
> I remember my DOS days and Turbo C++ when
> compilation was a zip!
>
> Thanks in advance (I hope).
>
> regards
> Frankie Kam
> Coordinator SOCS SCM
> www.stamford.edu.my/socsscm
> 012-6585109 (h/p)
> 06-2822613 ext-108 (o)
> 06-2821403 (fax)
> For important emails kindly
> C.C. to ka...@st...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "TornadoChaser" <kb...@gm...>
> To: <dev...@li...>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 1:26 AM
> Subject: [Dev-C++] virus problem? Adsincontext
>
>
> > List,
> >
> > I'm having a bit of a puzzling day.  I was told by my ISP that I needed
> > to run  a spyware check to try to resolve a connection problem I'm
> > having.  After running the check using Spyware Doctor (one of the ones
> > that they suggest will do a good job) it returns that seven .def files
> > in DEV-C++ are files associated with Adsincontext spyware.  This didn't
> > make much sense to me since the files to remove as per a Google search
> > suggest would be responsible for such an infection don't exist.
> >
> > Can anyone help me on this.  I'm confident that I didn't get a virus or
> > spyware infecting DEV-C++, but just want a bit or reassurance.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Kevin Huyck.

On 7/26/05, Frankie Kam <fr...@st...> wrote:
> Dear All Dev C++ users
>=20
> Does anyone know how to speed up the
> compilation process of Dev-C++?
> I'm running Win98 with a Celeron 1Gig machine. 64 Meg RAM.
>=20
> Previously I had Dev-C++ version 4 and
> then yesterday I downloaded the latest version
> of Dev-C++ Bloodshed...and the compilation
> process takes a long time compared to the
> previous version.
> Any tips to speed things up a bit?
>=20
> I remember my DOS days and Turbo C++ when
> compilation was a zip!
>=20
> Thanks in advance (I hope).
>=20
> regards
> Frankie Kam
> Coordinator SOCS SCM
> www.stamford.edu.my/socsscm

Ewww ewww ewww.=20

Buy more RAM and things will run sooooooooooooooooo much quicker.

--=20
Darsant Silverstring=20

"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding."
-Albert Einstein

The issue of ram only comes up when you are already crunched for ram.  That's why the previous suggestion to monitor memory usage via Task Manager (or whatever was the appropriate application on '98).  64MB of ram may be sufficient for some machines and OS combinations.  The fact that the compiler runs slower than the previous version isn't indicative of a ram size problem, as the previous compiler version ran with the existing ram without problem, right?
 
I would first recommend disabling the header file cache that Dev-C++ tries to compile upon installation.  I've noticed that this takes significant time, and recompilation of the header file cache occurs frequently.  Then monitor the hard disk audibly to see if it is thrashing.  If it is thrashing then that is the indicia of more ram possibly being needed.
 
Some machines, especially laptops, are notoriously hard to open and add ram to, and opening them may possibly void the warranty if one is applicable.  Provided that compatible ram is available.  Buying more ram is great for towers such as Dell's Optiplex GX280 or such, but is a shotgun solution that should be investigated and verified before spending cash!

Josh McFarlane <da...@gm...> wrote:
On 7/26/05, Frankie Kam wrote:
> Dear All Dev C++ users
> 
> Does anyone know how to speed up the
> compilation process of Dev-C++?
> I'm running Win98 with a Celeron 1Gig machine. 64 Meg RAM.
> 
> Previously I had Dev-C++ version 4 and
> then yesterday I downloaded the latest version
> of Dev-C++ Bloodshed...and the compilation
> process takes a long time compared to the
> previous version.
> Any tips to speed things up a bit?
> 
> I remember my DOS days and Turbo C++ when
> compilation was a zip!
> 
> Thanks in advance (I hope).
> 
> regards
> Frankie Kam
> Coordinator SOCS SCM
> www.stamford.edu.my/socsscm

Ewww ewww ewww. 

Buy more RAM and things will run sooooooooooooooooo much quicker.

-- 
Darsant Silverstring 
<snip>



Alfred P. Reaud
 

On 7/26/05, Alfred P. Reaud <al...@ya...> wrote:
> =20
> The issue of ram only comes up when you are already crunched for ram.=20
> That's why the previous suggestion to monitor memory usage via Task Manag=
er
> (or whatever was the appropriate application on '98).  64MB of ram may be
> sufficient for some machines and OS combinations.  The fact that the
> compiler runs slower than the previous version isn't indicative of a ram
> size problem, as the previous compiler version ran with the existing ram
> without problem, right?=20

True, but Windows 98 by itself running on 64MB of RAM is incredibly
slow. There's a huge performance increase going from just 64MB to
128MB and while it may not directly speed up the compiler due to more
ram, the passive boost the system gets from Windows having more RAM
will be very very nice.
--=20
Darsant Silverstring=20

"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding."
-Albert Einstein

Win98 itself runns very happily in 32MB RAM. It's all a question of how
bloated applications that are used together with the OS. With 64MB RAM I
have one machine using NT 4.0 together with an older Office and it runs
like a charm. No problem with memory. It does slow down a lot with Win2k
on the other hand.

Note that there are a lot of tiny task-bark applets that consumes 5-50MB
each!!! All just to allow easy switching between resolutions, displaying
battery status and similar. This world is full of bloated software.

If the machine is expected to be used for at least 12 months more, I would
recommend that you check if it can support more memory and if possible
upgrade it.

By the way - I have used quite a lot of laptops. Several of them have used
special memory modules. No laptop have been difficult to upgrade by adding
an extra memory module or replacing the existing module with a larger
(unless of course the laptop was delivered with the maximum memory option
already installed).

/Per W

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Josh McFarlane wrote:

> On 7/26/05, Alfred P. Reaud <al...@ya...> wrote:
> >
> > The issue of ram only comes up when you are already crunched for ram.
> > That's why the previous suggestion to monitor memory usage via Task Manager
> > (or whatever was the appropriate application on '98).  64MB of ram may be
> > sufficient for some machines and OS combinations.  The fact that the
> > compiler runs slower than the previous version isn't indicative of a ram
> > size problem, as the previous compiler version ran with the existing ram
> > without problem, right?
>
> True, but Windows 98 by itself running on 64MB of RAM is incredibly
> slow. There's a huge performance increase going from just 64MB to
> 128MB and while it may not directly speed up the compiler due to more
> ram, the passive boost the system gets from Windows having more RAM
> will be very very nice.
> --
> Darsant Silverstring
>
> "Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding."
> -Albert Einstein
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email

I'd also reccommend a upgrade of RAM.

I ran 98 for years on 256 (which you can now get for about $20 on
newegg.com) megs and it was very fast.  I also enjoyed a Athlon 1400
which was shamefully superior to its PIII/Celeron "equivalents."  The
machine, another 256 megs and an OS upgrade later, now server under
Windows XP, and it still performs quite well.  The Celeron never was
that fast, and if you get the chance, dump it in favour of a real
chip.  But a memory upgrade from where you're standing is almost a
necessity.  Even my laptop (1 GHz pentium M piece of crap) compiles
reasonably fast with only 256 megs of ram.  If you ever upgrade to XP,
keep in mind that XP requires at least 512 megs of ram to function
properly, but 98 was nice because it was so lightweight.

basically: goto newegg.com and buy a stick of RAM that's 256 megs
(should be about $20 - $40) and you're going to have a VERY happy
little machine, but if you've got the cash dump your pathetic little
celeron.  While the clock speed is quasi-impressive, the actual
performance is really nothing when compared to AMD chips of the same
era.  If you want cheap AMD crap of the same era, look to
computergeeks.com b/c they have it all.  I mean, the Celeron was
slower than the PIII for crying out loud!  I eked more performance out
of a Pentium Pro @ 266 MHz than you probably get out of your Celeron!=20
Seriously, upgrade if at ALL possible.

Next is to uninstall all other crap that isn't really necessary.

But yeah, that's the advice of Lord Sauron the Great.

--- Josh McFarlane <da...@gm...> wrote:

> On 7/26/05, Alfred P. Reaud <al...@ya...>
> wrote:
> >  
> > The issue of ram only comes up when you are
> already crunched for ram. 
> > That's why the previous suggestion to monitor
> memory usage via Task Manager
> > (or whatever was the appropriate application on
> '98).  64MB of ram may be
> > sufficient for some machines and OS combinations. 
> The fact that the
> > compiler runs slower than the previous version
> isn't indicative of a ram
> > size problem, as the previous compiler version ran
> with the existing ram
> > without problem, right? 
> 
> True, but Windows 98 by itself running on 64MB of
> RAM is incredibly
> slow. There's a huge performance increase going from
> just 64MB to
> 128MB and while it may not directly speed up the
> compiler due to more
> ram, the passive boost the system gets from Windows
> having more RAM
> will be very very nice.
> -- 
> Darsant Silverstring 
> 
> "Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be
> achieved by understanding."
> -Albert Einstein
> 

> Dev-cpp-users mailing list
> Dev...@li...
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE:
> http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys/devcpp/ub.htm
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dev-cpp-users
> 

  What I have noticed ,on windows the memory managment

is not that good as compared to OSes like LINUX .

  So what I personally recommend is to try an external
memory manager with your programs.But be warned ,in
some cases their use may lead to system instablity!
  
  I use 7-max < www.7-max.org > , an application
accelerator from the maker of 7-zip . It is fairly
stable and give the performance boost of 5 to 10% on
my system. Just attach 7-max to the memory hungry
application and notice the diffrence.

  In the case of dev-c++ , I achieved best results by
attaching 7-max to the gcc compiler exe (gcc.exe etc.)

instead of attaching it with dev-c++ exe. 
   




	

	
		
____________________________________________________
Send a rakhi to your brother, buy gifts and win attractive prizes. Log on to http://in.promos.yahoo.com/rakhi/index.html