Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!netnews.upenn.edu!vax1.cc.lehigh.edu!cert.sei.cmu.edu!krvw
From: sigurd@vax1.udel.edu (Sigurd Andersen)
Newsgroups: comp.virus
Subject: Responses to F-PROT query
Message-ID: <0003.9008141517.AA11481@ubu.cert.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 13 Aug 90 21:54:27 GMT
Sender: Virus Discussion List <VIRUS-L@LEHIIBM1>
Lines: 63
Approved: krvw@sei.cmu.edu

I ( sigurd@vax1.udel.edu ) posted a message, summarized by:
> I'd like to know if anyone has reviewed or tested [F-PROT, a set of
> programs by Fridrik Skulason] and what their experience has been.

Thanks to Y. Radai for posting a response to my query.  For those who
might want to know what other responses I got, here they are, with
authors' names removed (in case they want anonymity - but location
left, to show they're "real" people).

From: ...umich.edu	Date: Fri, 3 Aug 90 16:55:18 EDT

	It is great.  Cheap, SIMPLE, and contains tips on how to guard
against viruses.  It can be used to check memory, hard disks, floppies,
and it can be set up as a memory resident watchdog.  It has
documentation on the symptoms of several hundred viruses.
	The cost is $15.00 or $1.00/computer for 15-500 computers and
$2.00 above that.  The author is Fridrik Skulason at frisk@rhi.hi.is
or BOX 7180, IS-127 Reykjavik, Iceland.
	As opposed to Mcafee's SCAN; I have been a member of virus-L
for over 2 months and have seen a few complaints about SCAN but none
about FPROT.
	You can certainly afford to invest $15.00 to see whether my
enthusiasm is merited.	P.

From: <...@WEIZMANN.BITNET>	Date: Sat, 04 Aug 90 19:13:53 +0300

Hello,
I experienced the FPROT package.  I found it to be good in removing
but a bit slow when searching for viruses in memory.
If you don't care for speed use it.  It's a very good package.


From: ...@polaris.utu.fi	Date: Sun, 5 Aug 90 14:52:15 +0300

In comp.virus you write:
	[ ... part of my original message removed ]

Yes, I have tested F-PROT versions 1.07-1.12 and found them excellent.
I've been in contact with Petteri Jarvinen, a well-known (in Finland:-)
guy who has somewhat more experience of viruses, and he has told me
that F-PROT *is* good.
	...

>From ...@OBERLIN.EDU	Mon Aug  6 15:43:11 1990

We've decided to use F-PROT here at Oberlin College; we've now "bought"
enough licenses to have some of my colleagues guinea-pig it.  (I have
been the only tester here so far, and my other job duties leave me far
too little time to test any program adequately).

The reasons we've chosen F-PROT are these:
1) It seems to have the best price-performance ratio.
   (We can't afford SCAN!)
2) Frisk seems to update it with sufficient frequency.
3) Based on his contributions to VIRUS-L, Frisk seems
   to "know his stuff."

I haven't taken a look at version 1.12 yet.  One problem with versions
1.11 and earlier is that they are not effortless to install.  My hope
is to work up some sort of batch procedure which will simplify the
installation.
	...
	Houck Computing Center   Oberlin College   Oberlin, OH  44074