01-08-2018, 07:23 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-08-2018, 07:29 PM by newtusmaximus.)
elelme. Re Sophos
Yes you are correct - Your memory is excellent. I raised a query regarding a "positive" report. It had identified a small part of Lite.info as a FALSE positive. However if that sector was not subsequently "sanitised" it did not effect the rest of LL's operation. If it were to be sanistised, the system report to the hardware database would not function.
Security & Bug Fixes / Re: SECURITY SOPHOS - reported infection - False positive?? « on: April 11, 2017, 04:34:00 PM »
Yes you are correct - Your memory is excellent. I raised a query regarding a "positive" report. It had identified a small part of Lite.info as a FALSE positive. However if that sector was not subsequently "sanitised" it did not effect the rest of LL's operation. If it were to be sanistised, the system report to the hardware database would not function.
Security & Bug Fixes / Re: SECURITY SOPHOS - reported infection - False positive?? « on: April 11, 2017, 04:34:00 PM »
2006 - HP DC7700p ultraslim Desktop Intel 6300 cpu 4GB Ram LL3.8 64bit.
2007 - Fujitsu Siemens V3405 Laptop 2 GB Ram LL3.6 32bit. Now 32bit Debian 9 + nonfree.
2006 - Fujitsu Siemens Si1520 Laptop Intel T720 cpu 3GB Ram LL5.6 64 Bit
2014 - Fujitsu Siemens Lifebook E754 Intel i7 4712MQ 16GB Ram LL6.6
2003 - RETIRED Toshiba Satellite Pro A10 1 GB RAM LL2.8 32bit
2007 - Fujitsu Siemens V3405 Laptop 2 GB Ram LL3.6 32bit. Now 32bit Debian 9 + nonfree.
2006 - Fujitsu Siemens Si1520 Laptop Intel T720 cpu 3GB Ram LL5.6 64 Bit
2014 - Fujitsu Siemens Lifebook E754 Intel i7 4712MQ 16GB Ram LL6.6
2003 - RETIRED Toshiba Satellite Pro A10 1 GB RAM LL2.8 32bit