[escalader]

Larry:

It's good to see you in action here!

I did (i hope) get rid of the rootkit from SM 7, first I used SM 7 to disable it while running and then removed the kit from the start up menu.

I was interesting to watch ZA Pro report the attempts by SM 7 to start services in other programs to get to internet. Due to my settings on ZA these were all blocked!

Considering we bought SM 7 through ZA it is kind of ironic! Where do I go at ZA to get my $ back? Do you have a link?

I ran BD 10 rootkit finder to detect it and F secures Blacklite both found it!

I'm going to run BD 10 now to check it 1 more time and post the messages for you and others to view. It is gone! I didn't reformat.


//-----------------------------------------------------------------
//
// Product BitDefender Antivirus v10
// Product 10.2
//
// Created on: 19/02/2007 18:59:44
//
//-----------------------------------------------------------------

Virus scan options

Detection
[X] Scan boot sectors
[X] Memory Processes
[X] Scan archives
[X] Scan runtime packers
[X] Scan email

File mask
[X] Programs
[ ] All files
[ ] User defined extensions:
[ ] Exclude extensions: ;

Action

Infected objects
[X] Ignore
[ ] Disinfect
[ ] Delete
[ ] Move to quarantine
[ ] Prompt user

Second action
[X] Ignore
[ ] Delete
[ ] Move to quarantine
[ ] Prompt user

Virus scan options
[ ] Enable warnings
[X] Enable heuristics
[ ] Show all files in log
[X] Report file: C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Bitdefender\Desktop\Profiles\Logs\rootkit_scan\1171929584.log

Spyware scan options

[ ] Scan for riskware
[ ] Registry keys
[ ] Cookies

There is a highly rated (by others) rootkit tool, called Rootkit Unhooker 3.2.
RkU3.20.130.388. I have downloaded it but not yet installed it. I want to test it first on my disposable PC and do a bit more checking.

Waiting for you vote/post over at Wilder's!

[Larrylesq]

Good to hear you didn't have to reformat. Hew! I would call ZA CS & ask for the money back - must be within 30 days I believe. Otherwise, explain that they sold you a product that has a rootkit in it & see if they budge.

Mine was w/in 30 days - so they refunded w/o issue.

Thanks for all of the help!

Larry

[Timax47]

Hi Guys,

Just an update on how I am progressing with the debate relating to Sys Mech 7 pro and my battle for an answer as to why it doesn't work in Vista. I actually had a reply from a person not a machine <<<<< Very rare. As you can see from the message it is relating to system mechanic mobile toolkit and not SM7 (my query was about SM7) so whilst they are giving me information about a product I didn't ask for any help on, I at least got a reply.

I also have asked the question on the Vista security and general forums in MS newsgroups and the reply I got back from the MVPs was that it is the fault of the individual software makers for not having thier products Vista ready, However this message suggests that MS are to blame for not releasing the drivers to allow direct writing to the Hard drive.

Anyway, Let me know what you think........ Here goes



System Mechanic 6 Mobile Toolkit is not Vista compatible and has never been tested for compatibility on that platform. Only newer products, as of November 1, 2006, such as System Mechanic 7 are compatible with Windows Vista.

As it is, the entire security software industry is almost at a standstill because Microsoft no longer allows direct writing to the hard disk and has not released the necessary drivers to ANY software company to allow functions such as secure file deletion. The current limitation of our functions is directly caused by Microsoft Windows Vista, not our software. As for DriveScrubber 3, since System Mechanic 6 Mobile Toolkit did not come with DriveScrubber 3, I downloaded it, created a bootable disk and had no problem wiping a hard drive with Windows Vista Home Premium. I also booted from a DriveScrubber 3 CD and wiped another system hard drive with Windows Vista Ultimate. Are you booting from the DriveScrubber 3 CD or did you use the download version and create a bootable disk?

Thank you for your time and patience. If you have any further questions, suggestions, or comments about any of our products, don't hesitate to contact me. Regards,

Customer Service M,
Customer Care Representative
http://www.iolo.com/customercare

[rexgrant]

Hi again Timax
As we discussed in the first couple of posts,it is Vista at the root of most peoples problems.
Regards
Rex

[escalader]

Nothing new here unfortunately finger pointing started in the 60's with IBM and Bell blaming each other for telecommunication errors.

What I find unacceptable for our poster is the claim "....Only newer products, as of November 1, 2006, such as System Mechanic 7 are compatible with Windows Vista."

Then saying MS won't let us do x, y and z! What's that all about? It can't be said to be compatible if M$ has put the techi hex on all the 3rd party software utilities that were designed for XP etc. Then the client can't use the product that is incompatible.

Looks like we have a choice, go with Bill to the Vista party and forget our little packages we have added over the years to make us comfy

OR ( this is my path for now)

Ignore Vista and after enough dust has settled and enough joint venture money invested by the 3rd party people revisit VISTA in say 5 years! Maybe Linux will be a real alternative by then!

I don't need it and don't want it (now) I'm staying with XP!

[Timax47]

Thanks again guys, I give up, I am a beaten man, mugged and fleeced all in one hit.
So, MS mugged me by proxy. I guess Uncle Bill has a few more shekels than me and isn't interested in what I have to say. Funny how MS don't hold thier hands up and let us know that they are the root cause of the software problems, but by the same count it is deceptive for companies to tell you that a product is Vista compatible when it isn't at all.

[Timax47]

By the way here is the official list from MS of the software that works with Vista

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/933305

mmmmmmmmmmm

Timax

[Dawndd]

Hello -
I have extensive knowledge of iolo and there practices. Yes, It starts with a small i. The reason that I know this is because they completeley ripped me off and then intended to keep my money without delivering any software. I have a thick file on these guys. Forunately I am an attorney. Even more fortunately, I am exceptionally tenacious when an injustice is being done - especially to me. After a couple months of frustrating e-mails back and forth with their customer service director(They do know how to B.S. in order to keep you from going elsewhere for help)I had enough. I told them exactly what I was going to do, and I did these things. You should to. I got no product and they kept my money so this was a crime and I wrote to the Los Angeles District Attorney. This one doesn't apply to you. Everyone who reads this should go to the Better Business Bureau site to see what it takes for a company to get an "F" rating. The BBB has a system that goes from AAA to AA to A to BBB to BB - you get the picture. I always check this site before I buy anything of value. To look up iolo you need the following info: iolo Technologies, LLC, 7470 North Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, CA 90041, phone 323-257-8885. The BBB has given them a company ID of 13188175. The site is something to see
Anyway, if you purchased your software with a credit card then many of the cards have a system for dispute resolution. I would check that right away and file a claim stating that you want your money back. Chances that iolo will answer the claim are slim and then the card company will credit you. Please also write a complaint to the BBB, although it won't get you any money it will help others. Then there is the FTC - Federal Trade Commission. Sorry I don't have the web address, You can do your complaint online just like the BBB. The FTC doesn't get your money back but they put iolo "into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to hundreds of civil and criminal law enforcement agengies worldwide." (Quoted words from the FTC). Also, more importantly, you can really give them a hard time if you file with the California Department of Consumer Affairs. Sorry, once again I don't have the address. It is part of the California Attorney General's Office and they will do a thourough investigation which includes making iolo explain why they haven't comitted fraud. I'm still waiting for the results from that one. My credit card company did credit what iolo took from me and now they have to try to get it back from iolo. Good luck to them. As you can see I'm on a mission when I see the iolo name. In my spare time I plan to write to their partners and also to all of the magazines that review their products. I may even write the stores that carry their products. I always attach a copy of the BBB page.
So if you can't get the software to work properly it is because they lied, which they have done numerous times before. Try the actions that I suggested and it may get you your money back.
Good Luck,
Dawn

[Larrylesq]

How about filing a Class Action? Here is a link to a firm that I am very familiar with (albeit the NY office). They are pit-bulls.

http://www.milbergweiss.com/home.aspx

Milberg-Weiss: Los Angeles Office
One California Plaza
300 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3900
Los Angeles, California 90071
T: 213.617.1200
F: 213.617.1975

Larrylesq

[Dawndd]

Hello -

I like your class action idea. The problem is that in order for a court to allow a class action you must show that the company did the exact same fraud to the plaintiffs and the facts of each plaintiff's claim are virtually identical. So far you don't have that. I suppose if enough people by System Mechanic for Vista and iolo is lying about it being able to work with Vista then you would have a class action. It would be interesting. Does the firm that you mention specifically do class actions? That is what you need in a class action case. Then again, as a lawyer I hate to say this, but in class actions the ones who get most of the award are the attorney. You probably wouldn't even get enough to reimburse you for what you paid for the software. Your best bet is to buy these things with a credit card that does dispute resolution. Personally, I'm going after them in any way that I can think of, although I'm a bit limited by being in Chicago. That is how angry they made me. I hate to see people get ripped off, even though my case is over because my card company credited my credit card. As I said, I'm doing everything I mentioned in my earlier post.

Dawn the tenacious

[Larrylesq]

Hello Dawndd:

On your point: "must show the company did the exact same fraud to the plaintiffs and the facts of each plaintiff's claim are virtually identical." I agree technically that this is correct, but I think the statement assumes that the potential claims & underlying facts wouldn't be similar. Too early to make this determination w/o thorough investigation - wouldn't you agree? Further, something that was missed - you got your money back - so you don't necessarily have damages anymore.

I agree that the best option is to contact the State AG's office (consumer affairs division) & to try to get the CC company involved. However, if this is a widespread issue with iolo (which I think it is from a corporate behavior & accountability standpoint) then an additional remedy would be to begin a class action - just from the deterrent aspect alone - if not for the feel-good factor.

You are somewhat correct that class-action lawyers get a lot of the settlement money - however this is closely regulated by the court & the rules as the amount the lawyers receive must closely track with billed hours & costs. Thus, no windfall for the lawyers.

The firm I mention is a national class action firm. While they have two primary offices in NY & LA they handle many, many cases on a national scale. I used to work for them prior to 2001 when I began my own firm and started to teach.

Larrylesq

[Dawndd]

I have no argument with you. It was you who brought up the idea of a class action. I never mentioned suing them. As you correctly stated, I have my money back. I was basing the fact that there was no basis for a class action simply on the facts of my situation and that of the person who actually received the software which didn't work. I never received anything, nor did I order anything from them. I wasn't thinking about investigating what was happening to others out there. I think I mentioned that if iolo was claiming that their product worked with Vista and it did not then that could be the basis for a class action.

I'm going to stand by my statement that it is very likely that, depending on the size of the plaintiff group, that a plaintiff may not even recover the cost of the product. Unfortunately that is what I have seen in my experience. Perhaps that is because the courts in Illinois are very liberal in awarding attorneys whatever they ask for in their billing petitions. Judges barely even look at them. I'm not saying that they aren't honest requests for much time spent on the case. Your experience about reviewing what attorneys should be awarded has obviously been different.

I would say to anyone who has been defrauded by iolo GO GET 'EM. Do the class action, but if you also do the other things that I suggested in my post then you will be helping others while you attack iolo through government channels.

We are almost on the same page
Dawn

[Larrylesq]

Dawn:

Look, I wasn't arguing with you. I support you in everything. And I understand your frustrations & apparent anger with iolo. But I think it is necessary to clarify things so as not to potentially mislead lay-persons about the class action experience. I certainly wouldn't want someone to read any of this & draw improper conclusions.

For instance, usually, it is the class action firm that investigates before initiating the lawsuit (in my experience). So its not that individual consumers need to do it on their own b4 contacting a firm.

Also, while I don't disagree with you that in many class actions that victims usually don't recover all of their losses (maybe not even the cost of the product), I think it is unfair to suggest that lawyers are the ones who get most of the benefit. Yes, we are compensated for our time & costs; and rightfully so because of the time and investment involved in complex litigation (in some cases just the expenses can exceed $1 million). At the Federal level (most of my class action experience), these costs & hourly rates are regulated & must be substantiated to the court - even when they are part of a settlement agreement. State rules can obviously vary.

So, yes consumers rarely fully recover the total harm caused them - but this is much better than nothing, especially remembering the public policy underlying class actions: that individual suits are cost prohibitive to consumers. The costs of individual litigation usually far outweighs the harm suffered not making it worthwhile. Class actions resolve this issue & they also resolve the potential burden on the court system.

I think the main point here is that there are any number of paths a consumer can take. Like you point out, immediate options are filing a complaint with their State Attorneys General Office, getting their CC company to intervene, and the Better Business Bureau. Another option is to contact a lawyer that deals with consumer fraud and/or contact a class action firm to get their help. But don't rule out the class action option. Many class actions are begun by one or two people - and then after investigation by the firm they frequently expand into large numbers.

For example: One case I worked on was initiated by one person's situation. After investigation we found others that were seriously harmed & a pattern of misleading behavior by the defendant corporation. In the end, the class consisted of over a million persons and the settlement reached was $1.7 billion (yes - billion) against the defendant insurance company. Many persons in the class (some harmed more than others) were able to arbitrate their claims under the settlement by simply filling out a claim form & supplying their policies & other documents.

Plus, dare I cite product liability class actions like the Copper IUD that resulted in many victims (including spouses w/ loss of consortium claims) getting substantial rewards under the settlement to cover for the physical & emotional harm suffered.

Admittedly, these situations are not the commonplace experience - but I think the moral to the story is that one can't rule anything out, or make discouraging statements about a viable option, until the facts are known. And the facts aren't usually fully known until after investigation.

With the iolo situation, the facts aren't yet in. But there seems to be enough for someone to seek legal consultation on the matter. And, I would encourage this. I hope this clarifies things.

With Respect,

Larrylesq

[Dawndd]

WOW. I said nothing about lawsuits in my post and you just came out of left field and had a large rant in you that you needed to get out and printed, I hope that you feel better. I think you are barking up the wrong tree here. There are options to try before considering suing anybody and I gave those in my post and think those should be exhausted. I never even intimated that I wanted to discuss this subject. You should be giving your lecture to some victim's site or something. I don't need to be lectured to about the law or your views on class action suits. I'm a lawyer and I've seen what I've seen, read what I've read, and believe what I believe. I'm 48 with over 20 years of legal experience and if you've done anything it it to confirm my beliefs about attorneys who take these kinds of suits. You aren't talking to a layperson or a dummy. I think it's time to close this string up since it has gone astray. I'm finished discussing class action cases. Find someone else to rant to.

Dawn

[Larrylesq]

Dear Dawn: (you really didn't think I'd let you get away with your previous post did you?)

Its too bad that you are so upset about me clarifying "options" to other readers that may read this thread seeking assistance with their problems with iolo. My intention was to merely clarify the class action option in the hope of getting the message across that: those who wish to explore the class action option (or other option) seek legal consultation and not draw improper conclusions from online postings.

If you are truly a lawyer like you say - you would recognize that the explanation that I provided about the class action process was meant to explain to readers, most of whom are non-lawyers, that a class action is a viable option that one could explore (in addition to others) without fear that they must go to great lengths of investigation before seeking legal consultation. What's more, it was meant to also make clear that, contrary to some beliefs, class action lawyers are prohibited by the rules from receiving unreasonable portions of the settlement benefits or awards.

As a lawyer, you should know that lawyers have obligations; especially after identifying oneself as a lawyer in a public forum; not to make discouraging statements concerning a potential legal option that others may rely upon simply by the mere fact that the author has identified themselves as a lawyer.

You will notice that I didn't identify myself as a lawyer until after you said that "as a lawyer, I hate to say this, but in class actions the ones who get most of the award are the attorney." By your statement, you discouraged the class action option as being somewhat futile. Then you go on to chastise a "colleague" for trying to clear things up for the non-lawyer reader? Simply amazing - no wonder our profession has such a bad name. And, thank goodness we aren't doctors talking medicine where someone could lose a life.

In recognition that statements made in a public forum have an audience... And to be absolutely clear:

To forum readers: please do not draw conclusions about any potential legal option that is discussed herein. You have no way of knowing for certain if the person identifying themselves as an attorney on a public message board is indeed a licensed attorney (this obviously includes myself). So, please do yourself a favor - seek competent legal consultation before making any decision concerning the path that you take in resolving your consumer issues with iolo. None of my responses to Dawndd's postings to set the record straight about the class action experience is meant as legal advice. Appropriate legal advice is heavily dependent upon individual facts - therefore, only a licensed lawyer that reviews your particular situation can offer you competent legal advice.

Dawndd wrote: "I hope that you feel better." My answer: Now I do feel better - ethically much better! (with different import & meaning of the word "better")

No more gobbledygook. Time now to further assist people with their iolo product & experience.

With Respect,

Larrylesq