[clannie]

I did the Secunia test and was pleased with the results,however could someone have a look at the last entry which has Java entered twice.Should I uninstall one of them ?Will try to add screenshots to help identify as there is only one entry in add/remove.Thanks.

[TOGG]

Have a look at this thread; http://forums.techguy.org/security/5...available.html particularly #17 and my contribution #31.

Sun's numbering system does sometimes confuse and they do appear to have issued two JRE versions quite close together, JRE 5 Update 11 and JRE 6. I am still using '98 so I have the same version as you, 1.05.11 but XP and Vista users should probably have 1.6.

I got mine on 1st February, it was signed by Sun on 15th December 06 and it still appears on some Sun webpages as the 'latest' version! Perhaps investigating the links provided in the thread I referred to above will produce some clarification?

[ozgal]

I tried to follow your advice on the Secunia Software Inspector, but it kept saying I've got an old version of Java. So I followed your (later) advice on removing all old java versions and downloading version 6, but it still says I've got an outdated version of Java. When I click to continue on anyway, the INspector fails to run and says "there might be problems loading the java applet in your browser'. Can anyone help?
Thanks

[TOGG]

Secunia's Software Inspector doesn't run on '98 so I don't know anything about it. I wonder if the 'problem' could be as simple as the fact that Sun may have 'signed' JRE 6 a few days before 1. 5 Update 11 so, in simple date terms at least, 1.05.11 is 'newer than 6?

Both Java versions are mentioned in the list of applications the Inspector checks, so I don't know why it sees 6 as a problem, unless my signing date theory is correct; http://secunia.com/software_inspector_applications/

[ozgal]

Good grief Togg how do you know all this? Don't you think you should get out more? Thanks for your help...I guess I just can't use the inspector on my system. Actually, I've been noticing this on lots of things; websites saying I need to upgrade before I visit their site, or download something, but when I do 'upgrade' to what they suggest, they still have the same message and still won't let me through. Is it possible one of my security settings is blocking their ability to identify my software?
Thanks again
Ozgal

[TOGG]

You're right, I should get out more but I'm a serial lurker at various Forums (or should that be Fora?).

The whole issue of Sun Java versions never seems to go away and I have today read a newsletter which suggests that 1.05.11 should be treated as the latest version because 1.06 hasn't been updated yet (which is odd because it was only issued last December).

You may well have a wider issue than just your Java version but I don't have any particular expertise with regard to browsing problems. What OS, browser and firewall do you use?. Posting the exact wording of the error messages you are getting could help one of the smart people here to help you.

[escalader]

Hi Togg:

Maybe you should stay in so I can ask more simple ?.

took the advice and went to Secunia Software Inspector site clicked on start and nothing seemed to be happening! Did a task manager and it said application was running.

1) do i need to stay connected for this to run? i think it is a yes, but it's either dead or slow.
2) should I turn off all my security software for this to work?

In the past when doing this I found parasites sneak in during slow.... on line stuff

3) How long should I expect this scan/report to take?

[TOGG]

escalader,
There seems to be an ongoing misunderstanding here. I most definitely am NOT expert on the Secunia Inspector program, it doesn't work with '98 so I have never used it.

For what it's worth, I definitely wouldn't disable or reduce my security to run this, or any other, online scanner program.

Have you seen this?; http://secunia.com/software_inspector/ It makes it clear that you have to stay online for it to work and doesn't require anything (such as an ActiveX control) to be installed. If you aren't getting any error messages about the slow progress of the scan, it could be that servers are busy. I assume you do have the Minimum Requirements for it to work?

[escalader]

TOGG:

It's OK I just ask questions, sometimes they get answers sometimes not.

You answered good enough for me!

Every body here operates at their own risk, I'm the same!

Yes, my PC easily meets the criteria, but it just may be that ZA Pro blocks their site

[TOGG]

I would expect ZA Pro to be suspicious of being probed by a remote computer, but I would have thought that you would get a notification that the attempt was being made, perhaps with the option to allow it?

I know you can make special rules for ZAP but I've never understood exactly how it's done. I did manage to close certain ports when a particular threat was doing the rounds, but I don't think that would be relevant here. Time to wade through the ZA Help files or check their Forum?

[GlacierRose]

I had a problem with the Java not being installed error when I tried to run Secunia Software Inspector in Internet Explorer. I jumped through the hoops to make sure everything was enabled like it was supposed to be and the only site I can see Java in is the Sun website it says I have the most current version and I can see the little guy dancing.

I gave up for a day and went back and tried again with the same result in Internet Explorer, so I opened Firefox and it works in Firefox but I think ZA security suite is skewing my result or something is still amiss it says undefined has the latest security related patches installed.... enclosed is screen shot I'm guessing one of the undefined is the OS heck if I know what the other one is.

WinXP Home sp2
IE7
Firefox 1.5.0.10

[escalader]

Leave a AV and ASW on, disable ZA Suite and try again.

If ZA distorts the results, and you turn it off , one would expect different results.

The inspector will run faster anyway and you already know ZA is up to date so inspector has nothing to report on re ZA.

Please report back so we can learn together!

[GrDoorGuy]

A fix to the old Flash version staying in the windows/system32/macromed folder even after you install an updated version is to run the uninstaller located in the previously mentioned directory. You'll notice it removes the majority of the files but leaves a couple behind. It leaves these because even after a system reboot Windows is convinced the ocx files for previous versions are still being used. My personal fix is to delete all the files from this folder except the protected ocx files. At that point just change the security properties of the offending ocx files to deny and install the new version of Flash.

[ljs3509]

Thanks!I will try!