ML> EV> I would like to know what others think about my keeping these three   
   ML> EV> PUPs on my computer as I think they are OK and nothing to worry about,   
   ML> EV> even though McAfee says I should be worried about them.   
      
   ML> BR> IMHO it sounds safe enough,   
      
   ML>i'm of the same mind... i wouldn't worry about them...   
      
   Thanks Mike and Ben,   
      
   ML> BR> I have a few PuPs as well I had to "Allow" for Mcafee, though I   
   ML> BR> use the MS product now. Any program that kills processes will get   
   ML> BR> flagged as a pup I would imagine.   
      
   ML>not only if it kills processes but remember that the executable code is   
   ML>analysed for certain patterns... i've actually written DOS apps that were   
   ML>flagged as PUPs... why? because they were self-modifying... they stored   
   their   
   ML>settings options within the exe instead of in a separate file...   
      
   ML>i've also had some programs that shelled out to run others get flagged as a   
   ML>PUP... this was due to the way they poked about in memory grabbing parts of   
   ML>itself to write out to a swap file to free up as much memory as possible for   
   ML>the sub program to operate... these are only two reasons why a program may   
   be   
   ML>listed as a PUP...   
      
   I'm not a programmer unless you call my programming in QBASIC and LOGO   
   programming.   
      
   Tom gave me a link to read in the WIN95 echo and after reading it I did   
   my own search at ASK.COM and read a bit more about killwind.   
      
   Looks to me like something for HP Tech Support to use. while they are   
   looking inside a persons computer, to stop programs that are running so   
   they can tell if what they did 'fixed' the problem the owner had called   
   about.   
      
   ML>another one i've seen is the distributed.net dnetc.exe client listed as a   
   ML>PUP... there were folk getting it onto machines that they didn't have   
   ML>permission to put it on... they were doing this to build up their "farm" of   
   ML>machines contributing work under their account... dnetc.exe got flagged as a   
   ML>virus for a while because of this and then it was finally listed as a PUP...   
   ML>you are specifically running it, it is neither a virus nor unwanted ;)   
      
   That one sounds to me like something a user on a UNIX system might try   
   doing.   
      
   I'm not even going to do a search for dnetc.exe on the web because it   
   probably is WAY OVER my head!   
      
   Ed can take just so much of this high level computer stuff that's old   
   hat to you.    ;-)   
      
      
    * SLMR 2.1a #T348 * Her vocabulary was as bad as, like, whatever.   
   --- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux   
    * Origin: telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - Dial-Up: 502-875-8938 (1:2320/105.1)