This is getting more into philosophy and ethics than Linux, but I'm always up for a discussion. Yes, in in ideal world we'd all do what's right. I will also not that I /did/ specify this is "guerilla support" so I am obviously aware of this not being an ideal situation. In an ideal world, the EMPLOYER would have done the right thing in the first place - that is, they would have had an anti-virus/anti-malware tool installed. I should point out this is a fairly small operation and there is only ONE computer there (which made ME feel a lot better) - this is the machine used by my friend. This is also the machine that the employer expects my friend - a very, very non-technical person - to be 100% responsible for. My friend is skilled with MS Office, but they are expected to do everything from install software to debugging printer failures. My friend has to run backups onto their own PERSONAL DRIVES because if any data gets lost or corrupetd THEY ARE THE ONE BLAMED. A printer failure is what caused this mess in the first place. My friend tells the boss the (6+ year old inkjet) printer is broken and that they need to get a new one and/or pay someone to come look at it. Boss says no, and my friend still gets in trouble for not printing stuff out. So my friend who is, again, very non-technical, finds what they THINK is an HP support site and runs the diagnostic utility they are told will let HP access the computer... etc, etc. And yes, in an ideal world my friend could also quit the hell out of that job and get a better one, but... On Thu, 21 May 2015, Ryan Ware wrote: > The right thing to do would be to tell the employer so they can fix the > machine properly and be aware that they may have a malware infested machine > that may be doing bad things on their network and to other machines. To do > otherwise is irresponsible. The employer may be much more dissatisfied with > the employee if things drag on and the problem migrates to other computers > in the organization. > > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Doug Reed <n0nas at amsat.org> wrote: > I have nothing useful to add regarding a Linux boot disk image > to run > malware tools on a Windows box. I always question how recent the > tools > are and how well they are geared to finding problems on Windows > rather > than Linux. > > I think you already gave the best suggestion, install portable > versions of as many Windows AV tools as you can find on a USB > stick. > As Marc said, plan to use multiple tools and run each one at > least one > more time after it finds no errors, rebooting between each > test..... > My old routine was to use anti-virus followed by Ad-Aware and > Spybot > Search & Destroy because each one found different things. And > the > reboot often brought them back. I'm now using Malware Bytes in > addition to Spybot S&D and MS Security Essentials. For > anti-virus I > tend to switch between AVG and whatever else is free. I don't > let > Norton near any of my machines. > > If you want the last bit of safety, then try building a Windows > boot > CD or DVD as Andrew suggested and use it with the USB stick. I > may try > BartPE myself.... The boot disk prevents the contaminated system > from > executing and the USB stick is easy to update with the latest > and > greatest. That is my two cents and worth every penny you paid. > :-) > > Good luck with whatever you do. > > Doug. > _______________________________________________ > TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > > > >