Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Huh ? Java VM Yes or NO ?

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 9:43:58 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS03...
the quoted below is from this link.
I got a hit on a java malware and this was the follow up.
1st M$ says I have the VM, then tells me how to verify it and get the version.
and then it tells me if nothing comes up I don't have it installed.
Well 2nd statement, I don't have it installed.
I even did a full machine search for jview.
I would have to say that maybe the machine fixed itself and removed the VM. But
basically I'm trying to track down where the JAVA_BYTEVER.A Trojan came from.
I'm not having any trouble with java other than this Trojan.

It says I picked it up in real time scan on the 7th of march and quarantined it
then.

Trouble is I just went back to reinstalling some java games and stuff to my
website, and the coincidence makes me wonder if it isn't coincidence.
The hit was in my java cache, not in any of my web site files.

2 completely separate parts of the HD.

> communicate : I don't know if the Microsoft VM is installed on my system. How can I tell?
> communicate : If you're using any of the following versions of Windows, you definitely have the Microsoft VM installed:
> communicate :
> communicate : • Microsoft Windows 95
> communicate :
> communicate : • Microsoft Windows 98 and 98SE
> communicate :
> communicate : • Microsoft Windows Millennium
> communicate :
> communicate : • Microsoft Windows NT 4.0, beginning with Service Pack 1
> communicate :
> communicate : • Microsoft Windows 2000 versions prior to Service Pack 4
> communicate :
> communicate : • Microsoft Windows XP
> communicate :
> communicate :
> communicate : The Microsoft VM also shipped as part of several versions of Internet Explorer and other products. If you're in doubt about
> communicate : whether you have it installed, do the following:
> communicate :
> communicate : 1.
> communicate : Select Start, then Run.
> communicate :
> communicate : 2.
> communicate : Open a command box, as follows:
> communicate :
> communicate : • If you are running Windows 98 or Windows Millennium, type "command" (without the quotes), then hit the enter key.
> communicate :
> communicate : • If you are running Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, or Windows XP, type "cmd" (without the quotes), then hit the enter key.
> communicate :
> communicate : • In the resulting command box, type "Jview" (without the quotes). If a program runs, you have the Microsoft VM installed. If you
> communicate : receive an error saying that no program by that name exists, you don't.

--
more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html

More about : huh java

Anonymous
March 20, 2005 9:43:59 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Go to run,type:cmd In cmd type:jview If MJVM is installed it'll show.

"Husky" wrote:

> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS03...
> the quoted below is from this link.
> I got a hit on a java malware and this was the follow up.
> 1st M$ says I have the VM, then tells me how to verify it and get the version.
> and then it tells me if nothing comes up I don't have it installed.
> Well 2nd statement, I don't have it installed.
> I even did a full machine search for jview.
> I would have to say that maybe the machine fixed itself and removed the VM. But
> basically I'm trying to track down where the JAVA_BYTEVER.A Trojan came from.
> I'm not having any trouble with java other than this Trojan.
>
> It says I picked it up in real time scan on the 7th of march and quarantined it
> then.
>
> Trouble is I just went back to reinstalling some java games and stuff to my
> website, and the coincidence makes me wonder if it isn't coincidence.
> The hit was in my java cache, not in any of my web site files.
>
> 2 completely separate parts of the HD.
>
> > communicate : I don't know if the Microsoft VM is installed on my system. How can I tell?
> > communicate : If you're using any of the following versions of Windows, you definitely have the Microsoft VM installed:
> > communicate :
> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows 95
> > communicate :
> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows 98 and 98SE
> > communicate :
> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows Millennium
> > communicate :
> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows NT 4.0, beginning with Service Pack 1
> > communicate :
> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows 2000 versions prior to Service Pack 4
> > communicate :
> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows XP
> > communicate :
> > communicate :
> > communicate : The Microsoft VM also shipped as part of several versions of Internet Explorer and other products. If you're in doubt about
> > communicate : whether you have it installed, do the following:
> > communicate :
> > communicate : 1.
> > communicate : Select Start, then Run.
> > communicate :
> > communicate : 2.
> > communicate : Open a command box, as follows:
> > communicate :
> > communicate : • If you are running Windows 98 or Windows Millennium, type "command" (without the quotes), then hit the enter key.
> > communicate :
> > communicate : • If you are running Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, or Windows XP, type "cmd" (without the quotes), then hit the enter key.
> > communicate :
> > communicate : • In the resulting command box, type "Jview" (without the quotes). If a program runs, you have the Microsoft VM installed. If you
> > communicate : receive an error saying that no program by that name exists, you don't.
>
> --
> more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html
>
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 10:44:44 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:59:02 -0800, Andrew E. <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote:

> Go to run,type:cmd In cmd type:jview If MJVM is installed it'll show.
I think that's what I said. And what the link said. and the title.
I'm just trying to track down the source of the bad java that made it to my
drive.
The issue with the link is that it says nothing worthwhile.
1st it says if I have OS xx, I have the VM.

Then after it tells me how to verify whether I have it or not, it says I don't
have it.
DO I need it ? Nothing on that page tells me one way or the other.

After several more hours there, it seems I'm ahead of the curve. the VM is
being phased out and replaced with Java from the main java web site. I
installed that thing ages ago.

That's why I don't have the VM.

>
>"Husky" wrote:
>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS03...
>> the quoted below is from this link.
>> I got a hit on a java malware and this was the follow up.
>> 1st M$ says I have the VM, then tells me how to verify it and get the version.
>> and then it tells me if nothing comes up I don't have it installed.
>> Well 2nd statement, I don't have it installed.
>> I even did a full machine search for jview.
>> I would have to say that maybe the machine fixed itself and removed the VM. But
>> basically I'm trying to track down where the JAVA_BYTEVER.A Trojan came from.
>> I'm not having any trouble with java other than this Trojan.
>>
>> It says I picked it up in real time scan on the 7th of march and quarantined it
>> then.
>>
>> Trouble is I just went back to reinstalling some java games and stuff to my
>> website, and the coincidence makes me wonder if it isn't coincidence.
>> The hit was in my java cache, not in any of my web site files.
>>
>> 2 completely separate parts of the HD.
>>
>> > communicate : I don't know if the Microsoft VM is installed on my system. How can I tell?
>> > communicate : If you're using any of the following versions of Windows, you definitely have the Microsoft VM installed:
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows 95
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows 98 and 98SE
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows Millennium
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows NT 4.0, beginning with Service Pack 1
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows 2000 versions prior to Service Pack 4
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : • Microsoft Windows XP
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : The Microsoft VM also shipped as part of several versions of Internet Explorer and other products. If you're in doubt about
>> > communicate : whether you have it installed, do the following:
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : 1.
>> > communicate : Select Start, then Run.
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : 2.
>> > communicate : Open a command box, as follows:
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : • If you are running Windows 98 or Windows Millennium, type "command" (without the quotes), then hit the enter key.
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : • If you are running Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, or Windows XP, type "cmd" (without the quotes), then hit the enter key.
>> > communicate :
>> > communicate : • In the resulting command box, type "Jview" (without the quotes). If a program runs, you have the Microsoft VM installed. If you
>> > communicate : receive an error saying that no program by that name exists, you don't.
>>
>> --
>> more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html
>>

--
more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
March 21, 2005 12:12:46 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

"Husky" <cbminfo@toast.net> wrote in message
news:73gt31diqqgem4d05m904ddv941m0e0nv2@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:59:02 -0800, Andrew E. <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote:
>
>> Go to run,type:cmd In cmd type:jview If MJVM is installed it'll show.
> I think that's what I said. And what the link said. and the title.
> I'm just trying to track down the source of the bad java that made it to
> my
> drive.
> The issue with the link is that it says nothing worthwhile.
> 1st it says if I have OS xx, I have the VM.
>
> Then after it tells me how to verify whether I have it or not, it says I
> don't
> have it.
> DO I need it ? Nothing on that page tells me one way or the other.
>
> After several more hours there, it seems I'm ahead of the curve. the VM is
> being phased out and replaced with Java from the main java web site. I
> installed that thing ages ago.
>
> That's why I don't have the VM.
>

MSVM more than likely would not have allowed the nasty to get on your
system. You read correctly about VM being phased out (by a court order), but
that was over two years ago. What you have is Sun's Java, and that version
(which is the copyright owner that MS stole and renamed VM, and why it got
sued to remove it for free download from Windows Updates), is so vulnerable,
it isn't funny. I found a nasty in the cache of Java in my profiles folder,
but was able to remove it. Unfortunately, Java is needed for the most part,
but I also use Firefox which is helpful in preventing these occurrences. MS
will sooner or later get into (or have to) preventing nasties through their
browser (especially allowing Active X scripts) by making something better
than IE6.

Anyway, Sun (with the money they got in the lawsuit from MS over the use of
Java), has done nothing to fix these vulnerabilities in their scripting, and
MS will take advantage of that sooner or later. In the meantime set the
cache limit to a minimum (you'll have to test as you go) of allowing how
much is stashed. Some site won't work properly, unless a sizeable amount is
allowed. I have mine set @ 75K MAX. If it causes problems, I will increase
it, but I haven't had any yet.
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 2:08:04 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:12:46 -0500, "Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote:



>it isn't funny. I found a nasty in the cache of Java in my profiles folder,
I'll have no trouble removing it.
the 3 files found are

Application Data\Sun\Java\Deployment\cache\javapi\v1.0\file\ <--- in this
directory

BlackBox.class-3e9d2116-21cb5956.class
Dummy.class-6085e18e-1ed5b672.class
VerifierBug.class-2b88a9a4-49885d79.class

Far as I know, I have no way to control the physical size of the cache, but
that wouldn't really do much of anything anyways.

Again their source is my concern. I use java on my website. I don't have any of
the 3 named above in my website or their jars, [I don't use jars, they can hide
stuff].

And the cache above is just from java links I've browsed. There might be dupes
in my ie6/web cache. It had all the missing children thumbnails, plus the games
images and thumbnails.
But these 3 files are a mystery. They were quarantined by trends realtime scan
back on the 7th of march. About the time I resumed installing java on my
website.


>but was able to remove it. Unfortunately, Java is needed for the most part,
>but I also use Firefox which is helpful in preventing these occurrences. MS
>will sooner or later get into (or have to) preventing nasties through their
>browser (especially allowing Active X scripts) by making something better
>than IE6.
>
>Anyway, Sun (with the money they got in the lawsuit from MS over the use of
>Java), has done nothing to fix these vulnerabilities in their scripting, and
>MS will take advantage of that sooner or later. In the meantime set the
>cache limit to a minimum (you'll have to test as you go) of allowing how
>much is stashed. Some site won't work properly, unless a sizeable amount is
>allowed. I have mine set @ 75K MAX. If it causes problems, I will increase
>it, but I haven't had any yet.
>

--
more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html
March 21, 2005 2:22:15 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

That is the directory! If you go into Control Panel, open the Java Plugin
icon, you can set changes under the Cache tab. It defaults to unlimited. If
you need to have these remain at more than a certain amount, periodically
empty the folder by clicking the "Clear" button.

But as far as there source, you really cannot control it, because of the
holes that Java has, and you can only find out where they come from, by
going back to places you typically visit (or have visited) to see if they
come back, sans without having your AV catch them first.. Stash the baddies
in your AV's qauratine folder for n ow, to ake comparisons for future
reference.

Or, you can have your AV program monitor more aggressively (I suppose
anyway) to watch every little file that gets added to your profile as you
browse the net, pay attention to the AV alert, and then the site you get
this from should then be evident. I can say that since I found my little
bug, I haven't gotten another nasty since, but that doesn't mean I will not
get one.

"Husky" <cbminfo@toast.net> wrote in message
news:anrt31d9e5rov85dc727n48pf84hn2nlub@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:12:46 -0500, "Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>it isn't funny. I found a nasty in the cache of Java in my profiles
>>folder,
> I'll have no trouble removing it.
> the 3 files found are
>
> Application Data\Sun\Java\Deployment\cache\javapi\v1.0\file\ <--- in this
> directory
>
> BlackBox.class-3e9d2116-21cb5956.class
> Dummy.class-6085e18e-1ed5b672.class
> VerifierBug.class-2b88a9a4-49885d79.class
>
> Far as I know, I have no way to control the physical size of the cache,
> but
> that wouldn't really do much of anything anyways.
>
> Again their source is my concern. I use java on my website. I don't have
> any of
> the 3 named above in my website or their jars, [I don't use jars, they can
> hide
> stuff].
>
> And the cache above is just from java links I've browsed. There might be
> dupes
> in my ie6/web cache. It had all the missing children thumbnails, plus the
> games
> images and thumbnails.
> But these 3 files are a mystery. They were quarantined by trends realtime
> scan
> back on the 7th of march. About the time I resumed installing java on my
> website.
>
>
>>but was able to remove it. Unfortunately, Java is needed for the most
>>part,
>>but I also use Firefox which is helpful in preventing these occurrences.
>>MS
>>will sooner or later get into (or have to) preventing nasties through
>>their
>>browser (especially allowing Active X scripts) by making something better
>>than IE6.
>>
>>Anyway, Sun (with the money they got in the lawsuit from MS over the use
>>of
>>Java), has done nothing to fix these vulnerabilities in their scripting,
>>and
>>MS will take advantage of that sooner or later. In the meantime set the
>>cache limit to a minimum (you'll have to test as you go) of allowing how
>>much is stashed. Some site won't work properly, unless a sizeable amount
>>is
>>allowed. I have mine set @ 75K MAX. If it causes problems, I will increase
>>it, but I haven't had any yet.
>>
>
> --
> more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 3:12:50 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:22:15 -0500, "Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote:

>That is the directory! If you go into Control Panel, open the Java Plugin
>icon, you can set changes under the Cache tab. It defaults to unlimited. If
>you need to have these remain at more than a certain amount, periodically
>empty the folder by clicking the "Clear" button.
>
>But as far as there source, you really cannot control it, because of the
>holes that Java has, and you can only find out where they come from, by
>going back to places you typically visit (or have visited) to see if they
>come back, sans without having your AV catch them first.. Stash the baddies
>in your AV's qauratine folder for n ow, to ake comparisons for future
>reference.
If trend catches it again I'll know where it came from. trend pops up a
warning. I'm just thinking I didn't read these too closely when the warning
popup appeared.

I just want to put that site in my own memory to attempt to avoid it in the
future.

Or for that matter put it in trends list to lockout.

Aha 2 weeks ago I had to remove something calling itself purityscan. Another
problem. Possibly found something on it's site when I went investigating.


>
>Or, you can have your AV program monitor more aggressively (I suppose
>anyway) to watch every little file that gets added to your profile as you
>browse the net, pay attention to the AV alert, and then the site you get
>this from should then be evident. I can say that since I found my little
>bug, I haven't gotten another nasty since, but that doesn't mean I will not
>get one.
>
>"Husky" <cbminfo@toast.net> wrote in message
>news:anrt31d9e5rov85dc727n48pf84hn2nlub@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:12:46 -0500, "Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>it isn't funny. I found a nasty in the cache of Java in my profiles
>>>folder,
>> I'll have no trouble removing it.
>> the 3 files found are
>>
>> Application Data\Sun\Java\Deployment\cache\javapi\v1.0\file\ <--- in this
>> directory
>>
>> BlackBox.class-3e9d2116-21cb5956.class
>> Dummy.class-6085e18e-1ed5b672.class
>> VerifierBug.class-2b88a9a4-49885d79.class
>>
>> Far as I know, I have no way to control the physical size of the cache,
>> but
>> that wouldn't really do much of anything anyways.
>>
>> Again their source is my concern. I use java on my website. I don't have
>> any of
>> the 3 named above in my website or their jars, [I don't use jars, they can
>> hide
>> stuff].
>>
>> And the cache above is just from java links I've browsed. There might be
>> dupes
>> in my ie6/web cache. It had all the missing children thumbnails, plus the
>> games
>> images and thumbnails.
>> But these 3 files are a mystery. They were quarantined by trends realtime
>> scan
>> back on the 7th of march. About the time I resumed installing java on my
>> website.
>>
>>
>>>but was able to remove it. Unfortunately, Java is needed for the most
>>>part,
>>>but I also use Firefox which is helpful in preventing these occurrences.
>>>MS
>>>will sooner or later get into (or have to) preventing nasties through
>>>their
>>>browser (especially allowing Active X scripts) by making something better
>>>than IE6.
>>>
>>>Anyway, Sun (with the money they got in the lawsuit from MS over the use
>>>of
>>>Java), has done nothing to fix these vulnerabilities in their scripting,
>>>and
>>>MS will take advantage of that sooner or later. In the meantime set the
>>>cache limit to a minimum (you'll have to test as you go) of allowing how
>>>much is stashed. Some site won't work properly, unless a sizeable amount
>>>is
>>>allowed. I have mine set @ 75K MAX. If it causes problems, I will increase
>>>it, but I haven't had any yet.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html
>

--
more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html
March 21, 2005 3:25:37 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

I hope you sort it out, and use that to prevent future infections.

"Husky" <cbminfo@toast.net> wrote in message
news:0mvt31921c5ak5ip9jh9u4k60olov22931@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:22:15 -0500, "Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>>That is the directory! If you go into Control Panel, open the Java Plugin
>>icon, you can set changes under the Cache tab. It defaults to unlimited.
>>If
>>you need to have these remain at more than a certain amount, periodically
>>empty the folder by clicking the "Clear" button.
>>
>>But as far as there source, you really cannot control it, because of the
>>holes that Java has, and you can only find out where they come from, by
>>going back to places you typically visit (or have visited) to see if they
>>come back, sans without having your AV catch them first.. Stash the
>>baddies
>>in your AV's qauratine folder for n ow, to ake comparisons for future
>>reference.
> If trend catches it again I'll know where it came from. trend pops up a
> warning. I'm just thinking I didn't read these too closely when the
> warning
> popup appeared.
>
> I just want to put that site in my own memory to attempt to avoid it in
> the
> future.
>
> Or for that matter put it in trends list to lockout.
>
> Aha 2 weeks ago I had to remove something calling itself purityscan.
> Another
> problem. Possibly found something on it's site when I went investigating.
>
>
>>
>>Or, you can have your AV program monitor more aggressively (I suppose
>>anyway) to watch every little file that gets added to your profile as you
>>browse the net, pay attention to the AV alert, and then the site you get
>>this from should then be evident. I can say that since I found my little
>>bug, I haven't gotten another nasty since, but that doesn't mean I will
>>not
>>get one.
>>
>>"Husky" <cbminfo@toast.net> wrote in message
>>news:anrt31d9e5rov85dc727n48pf84hn2nlub@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:12:46 -0500, "Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>it isn't funny. I found a nasty in the cache of Java in my profiles
>>>>folder,
>>> I'll have no trouble removing it.
>>> the 3 files found are
>>>
>>> Application Data\Sun\Java\Deployment\cache\javapi\v1.0\file\ <--- in
>>> this
>>> directory
>>>
>>> BlackBox.class-3e9d2116-21cb5956.class
>>> Dummy.class-6085e18e-1ed5b672.class
>>> VerifierBug.class-2b88a9a4-49885d79.class
>>>
>>> Far as I know, I have no way to control the physical size of the cache,
>>> but
>>> that wouldn't really do much of anything anyways.
>>>
>>> Again their source is my concern. I use java on my website. I don't have
>>> any of
>>> the 3 named above in my website or their jars, [I don't use jars, they
>>> can
>>> hide
>>> stuff].
>>>
>>> And the cache above is just from java links I've browsed. There might be
>>> dupes
>>> in my ie6/web cache. It had all the missing children thumbnails, plus
>>> the
>>> games
>>> images and thumbnails.
>>> But these 3 files are a mystery. They were quarantined by trends
>>> realtime
>>> scan
>>> back on the 7th of march. About the time I resumed installing java on my
>>> website.
>>>
>>>
>>>>but was able to remove it. Unfortunately, Java is needed for the most
>>>>part,
>>>>but I also use Firefox which is helpful in preventing these occurrences.
>>>>MS
>>>>will sooner or later get into (or have to) preventing nasties through
>>>>their
>>>>browser (especially allowing Active X scripts) by making something
>>>>better
>>>>than IE6.
>>>>
>>>>Anyway, Sun (with the money they got in the lawsuit from MS over the use
>>>>of
>>>>Java), has done nothing to fix these vulnerabilities in their scripting,
>>>>and
>>>>MS will take advantage of that sooner or later. In the meantime set the
>>>>cache limit to a minimum (you'll have to test as you go) of allowing how
>>>>much is stashed. Some site won't work properly, unless a sizeable amount
>>>>is
>>>>allowed. I have mine set @ 75K MAX. If it causes problems, I will
>>>>increase
>>>>it, but I haven't had any yet.
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html
>>
>
> --
> more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 8:48:16 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

"Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:ucKxOAiLFHA.3788@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
> "Husky" <cbminfo@toast.net> wrote in message
> news:73gt31diqqgem4d05m904ddv941m0e0nv2@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:59:02 -0800, Andrew E. <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Go to run,type:cmd In cmd type:jview If MJVM is installed it'll show.
>> I think that's what I said. And what the link said. and the title.
>> I'm just trying to track down the source of the bad java that made it to
>> my
>> drive.
>> The issue with the link is that it says nothing worthwhile.
>> 1st it says if I have OS xx, I have the VM.
>>
>> Then after it tells me how to verify whether I have it or not, it says I
>> don't
>> have it.
>> DO I need it ? Nothing on that page tells me one way or the other.
>>
>> After several more hours there, it seems I'm ahead of the curve. the VM
>> is
>> being phased out and replaced with Java from the main java web site. I
>> installed that thing ages ago.
>>
>> That's why I don't have the VM.
>>
>
> MSVM more than likely would not have allowed the nasty to get on your
> system. You read correctly about VM being phased out (by a court order),
> but that was over two years ago.

>What you have is Sun's Java,
Many people today still have Microsoft's version of Java installed as it is
a requirement for many development platforms. It's on my system, as well as
Sun's Java, since I have Visual Studio installed. :-)



> and that version (which is the copyright owner that MS stole and renamed
> VM, and why it got sued to remove it for free download from Windows
> Updates), is so vulnerable, it isn't funny. I found a nasty in the cache
> of Java in my profiles folder, but was able to remove it. Unfortunately,
> Java is needed for the most part, but I also use Firefox which is helpful
> in preventing these occurrences. MS will sooner or later get into (or have
> to) preventing nasties through their browser (especially allowing Active X
> scripts) by making something better than IE6.
>
> Anyway, Sun (with the money they got in the lawsuit from MS over the use
> of Java), has done nothing to fix these vulnerabilities in their
> scripting, and MS will take advantage of that sooner or later. In the
> meantime set the cache limit to a minimum (you'll have to test as you go)
> of allowing how much is stashed. Some site won't work properly, unless a
> sizeable amount is allowed. I have mine set @ 75K MAX. If it causes
> problems, I will increase it, but I haven't had any yet.
>
March 21, 2005 8:48:17 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

"John E. Carty" <jecarty@NOSPAMsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:AND%d.348$c76.253@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote in message
> news:ucKxOAiLFHA.3788@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Husky" <cbminfo@toast.net> wrote in message
>> news:73gt31diqqgem4d05m904ddv941m0e0nv2@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:59:02 -0800, Andrew E. <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Go to run,type:cmd In cmd type:jview If MJVM is installed it'll show.
>>> I think that's what I said. And what the link said. and the title.
>>> I'm just trying to track down the source of the bad java that made it to
>>> my
>>> drive.
>>> The issue with the link is that it says nothing worthwhile.
>>> 1st it says if I have OS xx, I have the VM.
>>>
>>> Then after it tells me how to verify whether I have it or not, it says I
>>> don't
>>> have it.
>>> DO I need it ? Nothing on that page tells me one way or the other.
>>>
>>> After several more hours there, it seems I'm ahead of the curve. the VM
>>> is
>>> being phased out and replaced with Java from the main java web site. I
>>> installed that thing ages ago.
>>>
>>> That's why I don't have the VM.
>>>
>>
>> MSVM more than likely would not have allowed the nasty to get on your
>> system. You read correctly about VM being phased out (by a court order),
>> but that was over two years ago.
>
>>What you have is Sun's Java,
> Many people today still have Microsoft's version of Java installed as it
> is a requirement for many development platforms. It's on my system, as
> well as Sun's Java, since I have Visual Studio installed. :-)

I don't have it, and I don't want to have two versions. But I found Sun's
version to be more useful on sites I typically visit, where MSVM doesn't
work properly. Sun dropped the ball in security though, and I hope MS comes
back with their own version that is more functional than their previous. I
would loive nothing more than to rid of the holes that Sun Java creates.

>
>
>
>> and that version (which is the copyright owner that MS stole and renamed
>> VM, and why it got sued to remove it for free download from Windows
>> Updates), is so vulnerable, it isn't funny. I found a nasty in the cache
>> of Java in my profiles folder, but was able to remove it. Unfortunately,
>> Java is needed for the most part, but I also use Firefox which is helpful
>> in preventing these occurrences. MS will sooner or later get into (or
>> have to) preventing nasties through their browser (especially allowing
>> Active X scripts) by making something better than IE6.
>>
>> Anyway, Sun (with the money they got in the lawsuit from MS over the use
>> of Java), has done nothing to fix these vulnerabilities in their
>> scripting, and MS will take advantage of that sooner or later. In the
>> meantime set the cache limit to a minimum (you'll have to test as you go)
>> of allowing how much is stashed. Some site won't work properly, unless a
>> sizeable amount is allowed. I have mine set @ 75K MAX. If it causes
>> problems, I will increase it, but I haven't had any yet.
>>
>
>
Related resources
!