Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 146 posts

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#131

Post by ssl232 »

dspillett wrote: post #99
qalmakka wrote: post #66

I don't know, the more time passes the more I convince myself that the net benefits of antivirus software do not (an maybe never) exceed their downsides. In decades I've heard so many stories about AV software behaving suspiciously, using borderline shady tricks to monitor user activity, causing severe performance degradation, etc

> (an maybe never) exceed their downsides There were certainly times when they were necessary: when Windows had nothing built-in to defend itself, and for a time after then when those built-in features were crap. Those times are pretty much over now IMO. I'd go as far as to suggest that the market is now an attempt at a protection racket and hardware hawkers are complicit: things come pre-installed on new laptops and…

> There were certainly times when they were necessary

Around the time of Windows 7 I stopped using anti-virus software and nothing happened. And for a long time before that, paid antivirus software (ESET NOD-32) wasn't finding anything. I think the simple rules of having a router with a firewall, not clicking random files, not using Internet Explorer, and keeping Windows up to date covered 99% of possible exploits, and the other 1% was luck.

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#132

Post by katbyte »

pivo wrote: post #129
LeonB wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft ends up, wrongly, in the firing line for a bunch of things, similar to the story you told and to the sqlite_ comment in TFA. Notice that on iOS (for example) if an app crashes it just disappears > poof! On Windows when an app crashes (or you kill a non responsive app), you then see a dialog with Microsoft Windows branding saying that it is logging that the app crashed. As nerds we understand why… but the re…

macOS is a better comparison to Windows than iOS is, since iOS is just for iPhones and not desktops. macOS will show you the stack trace of a crashed app in a dialog. This allows more technical people a chance look into the reason for the crash. Users have the option to share the stack trace with Apple.

Does windows show the stack trace? I’ve been very appreciative of it in osx as it’s helped me identity how to avoid some

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#133

Post by chunkyguy »

ShadowBanThis01 wrote: post #8

Love it. Too bad there aren't enough Mac users to prompt a similar backlash against Macs littering every computer they visit on the network with .DS_Store and other turds.

.DS_Store has a origin story though not as entertaining https://www.arno.org/on-the-origins-of-ds-store

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#134

Post by freedomben »

katbyte wrote: post #132
pivo wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

macOS is a better comparison to Windows than iOS is, since iOS is just for iPhones and not desktops. macOS will show you the stack trace of a crashed app in a dialog. This allows more technical people a chance look into the reason for the crash. Users have the option to share the stack trace with Apple.

Does windows show the stack trace? I’ve been very appreciative of it in osx as it’s helped me identity how to avoid some

I can't speak for the latest version, but previously versions did. If the program had debug symbols in it, it would show you pretty useful info and would even let you debug it! The debug feature rarely worked though

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#135

Post by michaelcampbell »

qalmakka wrote: post #66

I don't know, the more time passes the more I convince myself that the net benefits of antivirus software do not (an maybe never) exceed their downsides. In decades I've heard so many stories about AV software behaving suspiciously, using borderline shady tricks to monitor user activity, causing severe performance degradation, etc

A couple years ago I heard a podcast that referenced a study that polled 2 groups of people; those that (admittedly, SELF) identified as "security professionals" and those that did not.

The data point was "what is the biggest thing your group does that the other does not?"

The professionals came in as "multi-factor auth" The non-professionals came in as "anti-virus"

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#136

Post by WorldMaker »

ssl232 wrote: post #131
dspillett wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (an maybe never) exceed their downsides There were certainly times when they were necessary: when Windows had nothing built-in to defend itself, and for a time after then when those built-in features were crap. Those times are pretty much over now IMO. I'd go as far as to suggest that the market is now an attempt at a protection racket and hardware hawkers are complicit: things come pre-installed on new laptops and…

> There were certainly times when they were necessary Around the time of Windows 7 I stopped using anti-virus software and nothing happened. And for a long time before that, paid antivirus software (ESET NOD-32) wasn't finding anything. I think the simple rules of having a router with a firewall, not clicking random files, not using Internet Explorer, and keeping Windows up to date covered 99% of possible exploits, a…

Windows 7 was the first version that Microsoft was allowed (by the US/EU antitrust decisions) to have Defender installed out of the box in Windows. They were trying to do that as far back as XP and "Security Essentials" (the name before Defender) was a free and easy download on XP and Vista, but without the protection racket style marketing it was easy to miss and not everyone realized that there was a nice, quiet Windows anti-virus tool from Microsoft just a click away. I still think bundled anti-virus was one of the stupider things the antitrust decisions blocked and it gave the protection rackets a few more years to solidify power that they didn't need.

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#137

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

lionkor wrote: post #71
thrdbndndn wrote: post #41

I often search for weird files in my %userprofile% (there are a lot random ones) just out of curiosity, despite I know they're not malicious. It doesn't help that if you Google any filenames, or even any semi-obscure file extensions, there would always be plenty of blogspam articles saying they're "possible virus". And oftentimes, there is no legit article to say what they really are even if you try, if they're from…

Could put the file(s) on a linux machine and run `file` on them

I expect that'll usually just give you a lot of "data" (i.e. some binary format that file doesn't recognize)

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#138

Post by krger »

codedokode wrote: post #127
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it were possible to determine the program name in a way that was portable and not too painful, it would be a nice feature for the library to automatically set a better default, both to save work for devs using it and to save sqlite devs the hassle of their library getting blamed for things that aren't its fault. Now, I don't think those conditions are likely to be met, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be nice if…

> If it were possible to determine the program name in a way that was portable Every decent OS in 2023 should provide a method for this.

>Every decent OS in 2023 should provide a method for this.

Yes, that's rather the problem—there isn't just one way to do that, which makes it a portability issue.

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#139

Post by mrguyorama »

katbyte wrote: post #132
pivo wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

macOS is a better comparison to Windows than iOS is, since iOS is just for iPhones and not desktops. macOS will show you the stack trace of a crashed app in a dialog. This allows more technical people a chance look into the reason for the crash. Users have the option to share the stack trace with Apple.

Does windows show the stack trace? I’ve been very appreciative of it in osx as it’s helped me identity how to avoid some

Windows often (or can be set to almost always) logs dumbs of a program that crashes, and you can open it up in WinDbg and see stack traces and things.

Re: Why sqlite3 temp files were renamed 'etilqs_*' (2006)

#140

Post by merb »

ssl232 wrote: post #131
dspillett wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (an maybe never) exceed their downsides There were certainly times when they were necessary: when Windows had nothing built-in to defend itself, and for a time after then when those built-in features were crap. Those times are pretty much over now IMO. I'd go as far as to suggest that the market is now an attempt at a protection racket and hardware hawkers are complicit: things come pre-installed on new laptops and…

> There were certainly times when they were necessary Around the time of Windows 7 I stopped using anti-virus software and nothing happened. And for a long time before that, paid antivirus software (ESET NOD-32) wasn't finding anything. I think the simple rules of having a router with a firewall, not clicking random files, not using Internet Explorer, and keeping Windows up to date covered 99% of possible exploits, a…

Actually an antivirus will only help if you already have malware. (Or if it scans downloads/websites) but it will, most of the time, not prevent new malware.
Post reply on HN