RunScanner -autoruns and antihijack analyzer program

Freeware Testing\Evaluation & Feedback. Open for discussions related to all freeware apps. All freeware should be 'wares free', meaning no adware, spyware or malware. Any 'bundled extras' must be included in posts.

Moderators: Admin Team, Moderators

Lusher
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:03 pm
Contact:

RunScanner -autoruns and antihijack analyzer program

Postby Lusher » Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:53 am

http://www.runscanner.net/


RunScanner is a completely free windows system utility which scans your system for all configured running programs. You can use runscanner to detect autostart programs, spyware, adware, homepage hijackers, unverified drivers and other problems. You can import and export your results and let other people help you to solve your problems.



Image





Very comprehensive autostart list

*Scanning of 80+ hijack locations ,Host file editor

Covers everything from autoruns, HJT, silentrunners and more. Malware will find it harder than ever to hide.



For beginner and expert users


Beginner mode:
"Safe mode" : no changes can be made by the user.
Targetted at novice computer users that want support from a forum or from a malware specialist.
Beginners can upload or post a text of binary ".run" file. Experts can load it up into runscanner, examine it for malware and mark entries for removal and repost it. The beginner can reload the file and it will automatically make entries for removal.

Expert mode :
Targetted at expert users, this is the most powerful mode.
All delete, filter, export, lookup ... features are available.


Easier to use

*Online malware analysis of results

*Verification of file signatures (Microsoft signed, Other Signed, Whitelisted by online database )

*MD5 hash calculation of files + online file rating

*Online lookup of scanned entries. (Runscanner database + Google)

RunScanner makes it easier to determine which entries are likely to be malicious.

Log analysis made easy

*Saving and importing of text files (all information available)

*A user with problems can save the .run file, an expert can mark the items that need fixing and send the .run file back to the user

If you are really worried, RunScanner also exports a easily readable textfile of all finding that can be sent to an expert for checking.


Malware removal abilities and misc

*Powerful process killer
-Kill multiple processes at once
-Kill and rename
-Kill and delete
-Delete at next reboot
*Regedit jump
*Explorer jump
*Extended filters
*Marking of items.

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Postby TeMerc » Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:04 am

Note to users: '*Online malware analysis', aside from single file scanners and full system scanners which are manned by anti-spyware\virus vendors is very unreliable.

Do not remove or fix anything unless you are 100% sure you know what you are doing.

I'm not very familiar with the RunScanner 'analysis', but plan on checking it very soon.

This not only applies to RunScanner but to any other 'online analysis site' of any type of similar log.

The best way to determine if your log has anything unwanted is to have it analyzed by a trained security specialist.
Image

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Postby TeMerc » Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:42 am

Ok, its been 20 minutes(40 til I post this actually, but started it at 20) since my previous post and guess what? The 'online analysis' which RunScanner ran on my test box missed an obvious entry.

I just installed WinAntiVirus Pro on my test box for another Google Blogger thing I'm working on and ran the analysis. It didn't even flag any of those entries, even tho they are a widely and well known rogue application.

So you can see my point about these 'online analysis' tools.

http://www.runscanner.net/report.aspx?r ... 6269979b5d

I'm going to run another online analysis tool to compare a little later on.

This seems like a perfect example to see how these scanners work....or don't work. ;)
Image

Lusher
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:03 pm
Contact:

Postby Lusher » Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:54 am

TeMerc wrote:Ok, its been 20 minutes(40 til I post this actually, but started it at 20) since my previous post and guess what? The 'online analysis' which RunScanner ran on my test box missed an obvious entry.

I just installed WinAntiVirus Pro on my test box for another Google Blogger thing I'm working on and ran the analysis. It didn't even flag any of those entries, even tho they are a widely and well known rogue application.

So you can see my point about these 'online analysis' tools.

http://www.runscanner.net/report.aspx?r ... 6269979b5d

I'm going to run another online analysis tool to compare a little later on.

This seems like a perfect example to see how these scanners work....or don't work. ;)


Hey Temarc, don't get hung up on the "online analysis", that's not the major portion of the program (and there are tons of warnings about it on the website and the program itself advising novices to seek professional help).

The database itself is laughably incomplete even by the standards of such services, though there are some ideas to intergrate it with some lists from say Castlecops , or allowing upload of suspect files to Virustotal in the future. But it will never ever work properly without expert knowledge.

It is meant first and foremost as a tool similar to autoRuns and Hijackthis! , which means use it only with knowledge! If you have some knowledge , it can help you research entries, filter out microsoft signed entries, other signed entries, or whitelisted entries, leaving you free to investigate other unknown (unrated) entries.

I personally investigate all unknown entries rather than relying on RunScanner to detect malware entries which is impossible for a one-man job really.

edit

I did a quick look at the scan you posted, I'm not an expert by any means, but if you only study the unrated files, you will see that the suspect entries are among the unrated files.

Still It does point out to one of the weakness of RS, which I have being trying to convince the author to change. The whole green for indicating files with digital signatures is perhaps a bit too optimistic....Since adware companies do indeed digitally sign their files... :D
Last edited by Lusher on Thu Aug 23, 2007 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Postby TeMerc » Thu Aug 23, 2007 11:27 am

Oh, I'm willing to give the RunScanner guys a little space seeing as they are a newish type of service, but come on, WinAntiVirus? These need to be rated red for sure.

Any rogue listed on the Web such as that one ought to be a no brainer for any online database.

And I'll go one more thing about online analysis vs. the 'trained experts', I've seen more than one of these trained experts make a mistake or two here and there. A couple ought not ever be allowed to analyze malware. Heck I've missed my share as well.

It's just a major point that needs to be mentioned whenever an online service is pointed to, regardless of who runs the service.
Image

Lusher
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:03 pm
Contact:

Postby Lusher » Thu Aug 23, 2007 11:44 am

TeMerc wrote:Oh, I'm willing to give the RunScanner guys a little space seeing as they are a newish type of service, but come on, WinAntiVirus? These need to be rated red for sure.


Actually I suspect right now there is almost zero red entries. It's main use is for filtering out safe entries. Anything left over is suspect and should be checked.

The thing is I don't think without some large scale co-operation any ordinary service is going to be able to be effective in listing even a tiny subset of the malware entries. That's a job for a big anti-malware company not a small website or one-man company.

Alternatively, I can envision maybe a system where hundreds of malware analyst readers, log what they remove into a big database, and from there we can determine which entries are most certainly bad (e.g if 99% of the time they are removed when seen). But that would be a very very big undertaking...

In other words, you will never ever get the human knowledge out of the loop....

And I'll go one more thing about online analysis vs. the 'trained experts', I've seen more than one of these trained experts make a mistake or two here and there. A couple ought not ever be allowed to analyze malware. Heck I've missed my share as well.


That's the point of RunScanner hopefully, it allows you to quickly establish safe whitelisted entries and focus on the rest, hopefully this will reduce the amount of errors.

Lusher
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:03 pm
Contact:

Runscanner 1.5 beta

Postby Lusher » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:02 am

Hi all,

Runscanner 1.5 is released today : http://www.runscanner.net

Feature overview : http://www.runscanner.net/why-runscanner.aspx

What are the most important changes in this release:
Classic mode : looks similar to HJT
Integration with virustotal, Fileadvisor (MD5), Castlecops (MD5)
All authenticode certificates are now analysed for all files.
This makes is easier to seperate the "real" microsoft files from the "bad"

*********************************************8
Really really cool, right click on a suspect entry, and it automatically uploads to virustotal for checking!!!

Do the same and it will check the hash of the file against Fileadvisor (500 million clean entries) and castlecops databases!

Runscanner makes narrowing down suspicious entries much much easier!
******************************************8


Image


New features:
----------------
New design in all modes
Layout is now shown correctly for people with "large fonts" enabled
Certificates of files are now analysed in all modes for signer/issuer
Certificates are now shown as a certificate image in the grid instead of the green/red icons
Virusscanner integration with Virustotal (upload file for scanning)
Integration with Bit9 FileAdvisor (lookup MD5 hash)
Integration with CastleCops (lookup MD5 hash)
New Classic mode : This mode is targetted at removing hijacks, it only shows non-whitelisted items and there is an easy "Fix selected items" button, all other "safe" startup items can still be found in the expert mode.
Added "Item fixer" tab in expert mode .
Added "classic mode / hijack" tab in expert mode.
Quick scan is removed in expert mode.
New in expert mode : loaded modules analyzer
Warning if windows version is not supported. (Only win2000 or higher is supported)
Added drivers with type = 2
Disabled drivers and services are now automaticly whitelisted in classic mode.
Runscanner now finds drivers with undefined imagepath.
Scanning is done a bit faster, the most processor intense part of the scan is still calculating the MD5 hashes
No internet connection is needed anymore during the scan.
Vista : Process killer now shows also protected processes

Bug fixes:
-----------
Fixed bug with corrupt MDAC installation in windows XP (used by history database)
Fixed visual "bug" with screen flash after quit.
Fixed bug with EOleSysError on incorrect/corrupt startup shortcuts.
Fixed bug with corrupt taskscheduler service.
Fixed bug with corrupt .run files.

Whitelist added:
------------------
A list of safe certificate publishers (56)
Standard search pages
Standard start pages
Standard safe zones (microsoft)
Blacklisted dangerous policies (DisableTaskMgr,DisableRegistryTools,DisableCMD,...)

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Postby TeMerc » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:29 am

Thanks Lusher, I got an email from Gert the other day, but didn't get a chance to check it out.
Image

User avatar
clif_notes
Freeware Research Specialist
Freeware Research Specialist
Posts: 562
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 12:13 am
Location: OHIO, USA
Contact:

Postby clif_notes » Thu Dec 13, 2007 7:10 pm

Just an FYI

I noticed Geert has a link to Temerc here:
http://www.runscanner.net/helperforums.aspx
Image
http://clifnotes.net
Devoted to promoting freeware and free information

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Postby TeMerc » Thu Dec 13, 2007 7:50 pm

clif_notes wrote:Just an FYI

I noticed Geert has a link to Temerc here:
http://www.runscanner.net/helperforums.aspx
Yes, he was kind enough to include it even tho I don't use it as a tool to remove\fix things. Very nice guy and is fully aware that as good as his tool may be, people need to get to using it and develop a dependable history. I don't doubt he'll make every effort to that end. I'm pretty sure a couple of forums use it and I've used it in some of my malware tests, when it shows things that HJT does not. I just don't do many 'live' infection removal anymore now that I have Sandboxie.

I have also noticed that their file library has been popping up at the top of some file searches.
Image

Lusher
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:03 pm
Contact:

Postby Lusher » Sat Dec 15, 2007 4:04 pm

New launch/hijack items 1.6

Restrictions for internet explorer:
080 HKLM\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Internet Explorer (+subfolders)
081 HKCU\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Internet Explorer (+subfolders)

Startup/Shutdown/logon/logoff scripts
090 HKLM\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\System\Scripts\Logon
091 HKCU\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\System\Scripts\Logon
092 HKLM\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\System\Scripts\Startup
093 HKLM\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\System\Scripts\Shutdown
094 HKCU\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\System\Scripts\Logoff

Various
110 HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\BootVerificationProgram\ImagePath
174 HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\VmApplet
200 HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Execute
201 HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\SetupExecute

Shell hijacking (removed from general policies)
162 HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\System\Shell
163 HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\System\Shell

Terminal server related
190 HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\AppSetup
191 HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Terminal Server\Install\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
192 HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Terminal Server\Install\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Runonce
193 HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Terminal Server\Install\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunonceEx
194 HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\LogoffApp

Debugger hijacking
176 HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\AeDebug\Debugger (thanks to Tony Klein)

Denying access to websites/IP addresses by setting a wrong static route (thanks to Bruce Harrison - nosirrah)
177 HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters\PersistentRoutes

Hijacking of standard windows tools
210 HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MyComputer\BackupPath
211 HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MyComputer\Cleanuppath
212 HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MyComputer\DefragPath
213 HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Accessibility\Utility Manager\Magnifier
214 HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Accessibility\Utility Manager\Narrator
215 HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Accessibility\Utility Manager\On-Screen Keyboard

Please don't do one of your infect yourself with malware and see if runscanner points them out explictly as malware.

Rest assured, RS will not replace you.

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Postby TeMerc » Sat Dec 15, 2007 4:15 pm

Lusher wrote: Please don't do one of your infect yourself with malware and see if runscanner points them out explictly as malware.

Rest assured, RS will not replace you.
I'm not sure if this is advice for me or for someone else? Are you implying that I'd run some sort of infection and then run RS to say 'hey it missed this'?

Nor do I understand this obsession you seem to have that I'm 'worried' or concerned that RS or DSS or any other number of system collection tools used in malware is going to 'replace me'.

Once again from you sir another post that seems to have more behind it than just information.
Image

User avatar
MysteryFCM
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Newcastle, UK
Contact:

Postby MysteryFCM » Sat Dec 15, 2007 7:00 pm

Just an FYI Lusher ..... you're not exactly going about the correct way of "winning friends and influencing people".

Those such as Tom help people because they can and want to, and not to boost their ego. Whilst some may be egotisically inclined, Tom certainly is not.

As for RunScanner, whether or not it is capable is neither here nor there at this point as either way - you're not doing it's rep any good by attacking people "in it's name" as it were.

Now, to quote one of my favourite radio DJ's - bog off!
Regards

Steven Burn
I.T. Mate / hpHosts
it-mate.co.uk / hosts-file.net

Keeping it FREE!

Lusher
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:03 pm
Contact:

Postby Lusher » Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:11 am

TeMerc wrote:
Lusher wrote: Please don't do one of your infect yourself with malware and see if runscanner points them out explictly as malware.

Rest assured, RS will not replace you.
I'm not sure if this is advice for me or for someone else? Are you implying that I'd run some sort of infection and then run RS to say 'hey it missed this'?


The advise is not *just* for you. As for your second question, please refer to the 3rd post in this thread. :D

TeMerc wrote: Ok, its been 20 minutes(40 til I post this actually, but started it at 20) since my previous post and guess what? The 'online analysis' which RunScanner ran on my test box missed an obvious entry.

I just installed WinAntiVirus Pro on my test box for another Google Blogger thing I'm working on and ran the analysis. It didn't even flag any of those entries, even tho they are a widely and well known rogue application.


Sure looks like infecting yourself and then saying "hey you missed that"..... Or have you forgotten?

Nor do I understand this obsession you seem to have that I'm 'worried' or concerned that RS or DSS or any other number of system collection tools used in malware is going to 'replace me'.


Well I hope you can see where I am coming from.....

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Postby TeMerc » Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:26 am

Lusher wrote:
Ok, its been 20 minutes(40 til I post this actually, but started it at 20) since my previous post and guess what? The 'online analysis' which RunScanner ran on my test box missed an obvious entry.

I just installed WinAntiVirus Pro on my test box for another Google Blogger thing I'm working on and ran the analysis. It didn't even flag any of those entries, even tho they are a widely and well known rogue application.


Sure looks like infecting yourself and then saying "hey you missed that"..... Or have you forgotten?
As I wold expect you take a comment and twist it to suit your needs. That comment had nothing to do with the scanner, but the online analysis, which are two separate things. And I would expect it to miss some stuff, just not something as blatant as that, and btw, if I recall correctly, Geert said he had to make some adjustments as I'd pointed him to that thread back when I wrote it up.

lusher wrote:Well I hope you can see where I am coming from.....
No, there isn't any confusion about where you're coming from, I'm pretty sure everyone knows that. I'd reference the multiple forums where you're either banned or have been warned at, so it's clear.
Image

Lusher
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:03 pm
Contact:

Postby Lusher » Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:30 am

MysteryFCM wrote:Just an FYI Lusher ..... you're not exactly going about the correct way of "winning friends and influencing people".

Those such as Tom help people because they can and want to, and not to boost their ego. Whilst some may be egotisically inclined, Tom certainly is not.


Do you really believe that? I used to think so, until i read his third post in this thread. Seems he is not immune to this very common disease...

I really can't explain his reaction otherwise. It is billed as HJT replacement, there are warning all over the place. And guess which part he tries to use and decredit?

As for RunScanner, whether or not it is capable is neither here nor there at this point as either way - you're not doing it's rep any good by attacking people "in it's name" as it were.


I have nothing to do with RunScanner. if you are silly enough to reject such an excellent tool, shows how narrow minded and egotically inclined you are.

As people have rudely pointed to me I'm not "known" to this little cozy insecular "malware fighter" community, so my opinion is worth nothing and I know nothing compared to even the noobish member who a week ago was crying about being infected and just received a silly staff title a week ago.

People happily quote and link to stuff i create (as long as they think that it was created by someone who is "on staff"). But when i dare to disagree even the slighest with anyone of them, I'm reminded of my place (I don't do HJT logs, so i can't know anything!). Because i don't borther to go through one of the silly bootcamps it means i'm wrong.

Lusher
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:03 pm
Contact:

Postby Lusher » Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:40 am

TeMerc wrote:That comment had nothing to do with the scanner, but the online analysis, which are two separate things


Okay, that's that. It seems you are the same as the rest, too high and mighty to admit you are wrong. Or can be biased. Or have blindspots.

Anyone reading this thread without bias, will see that the one twisting words is you. The online analysis is part of runscanner, that is why you replied in this thread... if the online analysis was something not part of runscanner why would you post your comment about a "seperate thing" here? lol.

My comment was perfectly correct, do not try to infect yourself to prove to yourself that runscanner cannot replace human expertise...'

Seems you clean forgotten what you did the first time around...

I'd reference the multiple forums where you're either banned or have been warned at, so it's clear.


Yes, the "expert" who gets pissed when he is shown to be wrong. Happens all the time... Typical....

Oh well I can't expect you to admit you are wrong... You are never wrong right?

User avatar
MysteryFCM
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Newcastle, UK
Contact:

Postby MysteryFCM » Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:23 am

Lusher wrote:Do you really believe that?


Where Tom is concerned?, absolutely and unequivically.

Lusher wrote:I have nothing to do with RunScanner. if you are silly enough to reject such an excellent tool, shows how narrow minded and egotically inclined you are.


I've not rejected nor recommended it either way.
Regards

Steven Burn
I.T. Mate / hpHosts
it-mate.co.uk / hosts-file.net

Keeping it FREE!

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Postby TeMerc » Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:53 am

Okay, that's that. It seems you are the same as the rest, too high and mighty to admit you are wrong. Or can be biased. Or have blindspots.
Ok, so here I am disagreeing with you on how I view a product and I'm biased or wrong? How's that?
Anyone reading this thread without bias, will see that the one twisting words is you. The online analysis is part of runscanner, that is why you replied in this thread... if the online analysis was something not part of runscanner why would you post your comment about a "seperate thing" here? lol.
AFAIC, the online analysis is a totally separate thing than what the tool sees and the log produces. One involves an automated examination, which to date, none have been accredited with being good enough to pass muster. This being that there are far too many possibilities to get that analysis wrong on an item here and there. The biggest problem is that with one incorrect 'fix' as with any tool or with one improperly designated 'fix' like one perhaps from an security analysts, things could cripple users machines.

But we can agree to disagree about how we view that part of RS overall analysis.

So in this respect, as I mentioned in my PM to you, it's all a matter of trust, and RS has a long way to go before it's embraced by the community by and large. But this would be with any new tool, not just RS.
I'd reference the multiple forums where you're either banned or have been warned at, so it's clear.


Yes, the "expert" who gets pissed when he is shown to be wrong. Happens all the time... Typical....

Oh well I can't expect you to admit you are wrong... You are never wrong right?
What does the fact that me alerting users who read this have to do with me being wrong, other than to let them know that because of your lack of tact and basic courtesy, that you've been banned for it?

You've not been banned for your opinions on RS nor for voicing the fact you think it's the best thing since sliced bread.

No, in fact, all the forums where I've seen conversations about you, have absolutely nothing what so ever to do with your opinions or content, but rather in the manner in which they are presented.

You really do need to read about how to win friends and influence people.

I do know one thing, if I were to see the way you 'defend' RS, and I was the developer, I'd ask you to please stop 'defending' me.
Image

User avatar
JeanInMontana
Posts: 2570
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 9:47 am
Gender: Female
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: More than 4 hours a day
Location: South Central Montana USA
Contact:

Postby JeanInMontana » Wed Dec 26, 2007 10:09 am

Whew! It is a good thing RunScanner is known for who actually makes it rather than the troll professing to defend it. Has anyone pointed this out to Geert? It sure isn't a good way to promote the program.
Image Image


Return to “Freeware Research Center”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest