If you actually execute a virus

[hambone2]

Say if you let a virus "in" by actually clicking on the executable and running it, are you pretty SOL? Or if you ran a Virus scan with Norton 360, will it get it, and all will be better?

Or , if the program/virus is already Executed, you're pretty much done for entirely?

Reason I asked was, apparently I had a virus running in the background (and Norton didn't even find a virus when I did a full comprehensive scan)...and the virus was STILL there , running in the background.

Any reason for this?

[Teknophobia]

Perhaps you didn't have the latest definitions loaded. AV software will usually prevent you from opening a virii'd executable (so long as it recognises it!).

TEk

[hambone2]

Perhaps you didn't have the latest definitions loaded. AV software will usually prevent you from opening a virii'd executable (so long as it recognises it!).

TEk

Sorry, that's a negative.....my Definitions are always up-to-date.

[fink]

Executing a virus isn't good obviously but nearly every one of our threads about infection problems here and in the hijackthis forum are for computers that have done exactly that. I'd say the fix rate is probably better than 75% and would be higher if the users sometimes had a bit more patience... so no, you aren't SOL.

Nearly every user had an a/v running. They aren't perfect by a long shot though some are better certainly... that's why we always recommend a mutli layered approach to computer security starting with user awareness and safe computing habits.

I always multiscan a file that I"ve downloaded here at this multiscan site to get a range of a/v opinions...

http://virusscan.jotti.org/