hack tool win 32 auto kms ?

[Thodep]

...

Technically, it's only a virus if it self replicates.

A TH that replicates itself normally, there's multiple types of Virus and not all replicate.

The best part is when you consider the fact that most antivirus software has a 40% or higher false negative ratting, meaning 40% of the stuff it says isn't malicious is in fact malicious code. And also they tend to have a 60-80% false positive ratings. (EDIT: this is based on a 7 year old study, no idea what the numbers are now; but in this study "Node 32" scored the best, but was the least known and used).

This is false nowadays, FP rates are way below 5% nowadays in most Anti-Virus programs, Windows Defender being one the few that fall short (a little obfuscation is enough to trigger a WD FP).
WD is actually quite annoying as it has buggy exceptions rules and is sensitive to FP, lost count of how many programs (made by me) I had to sent to Microsoft for whitelisting.

[Link]
"A computer virus is a type of malicious software that, when executed, replicates itself by modifying other computer programs and inserting its own code. When this replication succeeds, the affected areas are then said to be "infected" with a computer virus."

You might be thinking of worms or some other malicious code, but to be a virus it has to self replicate; that's even where the name comes from. I get that it's used incorrectly all the time, but that doesn't make it correct.

And like I said it was like 7 years ago that I read that study (couldn't find it to post). I could only find articles and studies that seemed to be more interested in selling AV software and not really study it; and these gave MS a 3% FP rating. But I don't have accesses to the same libraries anymore (like JSTOR). So it's hard to say.

I'm not thinking worms, using wikipedia as source is ridiculous at best. What you talking about is TH as I stated, I'm not going to repeat what I already said.
Here take this, [Link]
Is from professionals and not kids who edit wikipedia, suggest you read carefully this quote,

Some computer viruses are programmed to harm your computer by damaging programs, deleting files, or reformatting the hard drive. Others simply replicate themselves or flood a network with traffic, making it impossible to perform any internet activity. Even less harmful computer viruses can significantly disrupt your system’s performance, sapping computer memory and causing frequent computer crashes.

Which clearly state not all virus replicate, I can go and grab a similar page of all the Anti-Virus companies who agree with me, believe me this is not a discussion you wanna have with me as I work in cyber security.
The description you gave me falls into a TH, and not all virus, which goes in line with what I said earlier.
Replication is an option and not a rule.
If you wanna keep this discussion go ahead, I'll simply go grab more sources from professionals who agree with me, or you can be reasonable and actually learn something.

[TimFun13]

...

[Link]

[Thodep]

...

[Link]

Keep reading on how it works and spreads, if you keep reading between the lines you're not to learn anything.

However, some viruses overwrite other programs with copies of themselves, which destroys the host program altogether.

Some is the key word, you making a rule out of an option, if you truly believe a program needs to replicate to be a Virus, you're going to get infected.
Virus are simple Software and only replicates if the guy who did it wants it too, making a rule out of it is not smart.
I also suggest you don't confuse spread with replicate.
Is so easy to make a virus and there's no set of rules to make it a virus, the moment it's malicious is a virus, doesn't need to replicate.
The moment they're executed they can brick a system if done that way, with no replication done.

[TimFun13]

...

[Link]

Keep reading on how it works and spreads, if you keep reading between the lines you're not to learn anything.

It's just some random company's site, not an accredited study.
Just start with the base word "virus". [Link]
And I literally highlighted "a line", so not sure were the "reading between the lines" comes from; that tends to be used when something is inferred or added.

[TimFun13]

...

[Link]

Keep reading on how it works and spreads, if you keep reading between the lines you're not to learn anything.

However, some viruses overwrite other programs with copies of themselves, which destroys the host program altogether.

Some is the key word, you making a rule out of an option, if you truly believe a program needs to replicate to be a Virus, you're going to get infected.
Virus are simple Software and only replicates if the guy who did it wants it too, making a rule out of it is not smart.
I also suggest you don't confuse spread with replicate.
Is so easy to make a virus and there's no set of rules to make it a virus, the moment it's malicious is a virus, doesn't need to replicate.
The moment they're executed they can brick a system if done that way, with no replication done.

Again, Worms spread; but a virus "self replicates". If some thing else replicates it, it's not a virus. Technically it doesn't even need a payload, but just "self replicate" to be a true virus.

...I get that it's used incorrectly all the time, but that doesn't make it correct....

But I like how your conclusion is "inferred".

EDIT:
[Link]
Some:
1. being an unknown, undetermined, or unspecified unit or thing

[Link]
[Link]

[Thodep]

[Link]

Keep reading on how it works and spreads, if you keep reading between the lines you're not to learn anything.

However, some viruses overwrite other programs with copies of themselves, which destroys the host program altogether.

Some is the key word, you making a rule out of an option, if you truly believe a program needs to replicate to be a Virus, you're going to get infected.
Virus are simple Software and only replicates if the guy who did it wants it too, making a rule out of it is not smart.
I also suggest you don't confuse spread with replicate.
Is so easy to make a virus and there's no set of rules to make it a virus, the moment it's malicious is a virus, doesn't need to replicate.
The moment they're executed they can brick a system if done that way, with no replication done.

Again, Worms spread; but a virus "self replicates". If some thing else replicates it, it's not a virus. Technically it doesn't even need a payload, but just "self replicate" to be a true virus.

...I get that it's used incorrectly all the time, but that doesn't make it correct....

But I like how your conclusion is "inferred".

EDIT:
[Link]
Some:
1. being an unknown, undetermined, or unspecified unit or thing

[Link]
[Link]

You not even reading the stuff you send, nor what I say, stop wasting my time.

[TimFun13]

...

I also could have said, technically the trainer can be infected with a virus. But by it self, can't be a virus; it would be a worm then.

EDIT:
But for either it would still need to replicate.

[TimFun13]

Keep reading on how it works and spreads, if you keep reading between the lines you're not to learn anything.

Some is the key word, you making a rule out of an option, if you truly believe a program needs to replicate to be a Virus, you're going to get infected.
Virus are simple Software and only replicates if the guy who did it wants it too, making a rule out of it is not smart.
I also suggest you don't confuse spread with replicate.
Is so easy to make a virus and there's no set of rules to make it a virus, the moment it's malicious is a virus, doesn't need to replicate.
The moment they're executed they can brick a system if done that way, with no replication done.

Again, Worms spread; but a virus "self replicates". If some thing else replicates it, it's not a virus. Technically it doesn't even need a payload, but just "self replicate" to be a true virus.

...I get that it's used incorrectly all the time, but that doesn't make it correct....

But I like how your conclusion is "inferred".

EDIT:
[Link]
Some:
1. being an unknown, undetermined, or unspecified unit or thing

[Link]
[Link]

You not even reading the stuff you send, nor what I say, stop wasting my time.

I read it, that's why I was laughing at your use of "if you keep reading between the lines you're not to learn anything"; then take "some" and giving a set amount to it. For one.

But you remind me of a meme, a woman on LinkedIn that was "head of cyber security" with an "Art History Major".

[Thodep]

Again, Worms spread; but a virus "self replicates". If some thing else replicates it, it's not a virus. Technically it doesn't even need a payload, but just "self replicate" to be a true virus.


But I like how your conclusion is "inferred".

EDIT:
[Link]
Some:
1. being an unknown, undetermined, or unspecified unit or thing

[Link]
[Link]

You not even reading the stuff you send, nor what I say, stop wasting my time.

I read it, that's why I was laughing at your use of "if you keep reading between the lines you're not to learn anything"; then take "some" and giving a set amount to it. For one.

But you remind me of a meme, a woman on LinkedIn that was "head of cyber security" with an "Art History Major".

Then laugh all you want, lacking arguments and sense you go OFF TOPIC while resorting to childish memes, typical.
When you get a degree in Computer Networks and Cybersecurity and +8y of work experience in Cybersecurity, you may try to talk with me again.
Until then like I said before don't waste my time, I don't have time for wannabes.

[TimFun13]

You not even reading the stuff you send, nor what I say, stop wasting my time.

I read it, that's why I was laughing at your use of "if you keep reading between the lines you're not to learn anything"; then take "some" and giving a set amount to it. For one.

But you remind me of a meme, a woman on LinkedIn that was "head of cyber security" with an "Art History Major".

Then laugh all you want, lacking arguments and sense you go OFF TOPIC while resorting to childish memes, typical.
When you get a degree in Computer Networks and Cybersecurity and +8y of work experience in Cybersecurity, you may try to talk with me again.
Until then like I said before don't waste my time, I don't have time for wannabes.

Off Topic, Really; You might want to re-read some posts, you went off topic first? Plus you seem to be the only one trying to "wannabe" anything.
I was just pointing out facts.

EDIT:
With +8yrs in Cybersecurity, and a degree; I would think you could do better citing than a corporate webpage. And centering your argument around the use of the word "some". Plus you still don't know what a virus is, which is why most "Cybersecurity" is a joke.

[STN]

The definition of virus as Tim tells it is what i was taught in school(first semester of computer science) years ago. I remembered it well since that day because it was similar to a real life virus in that they replicate pretty well too.

[TimFun13]

The definition of virus as Tim tells it is what i was taught in school(first semester of computer science) years ago. I remembered it well since that day because it was similar to a real life virus in that they replicate pretty well too.

I would've given up long ago, but it got personal.

...using wikipedia as source is ridiculous at best...

[Vee_]

Well, it is a virus actually lol.

It's subjective . Half of the antivirus in your link are not considering it as virus..

In the end it all comes down to how much do you trust the source(where you are getting the trainer). Also, see if it's rated positive by others.
And , upon running the trainer if Windows ask you to give permission to network access then delete it immediately.

Ikr, it's my personal "feeling" toward trainers and when i said, "Well, it is a virus actually" i am using av point of view, they tend to generalize most malicious program as a virus, lol. I understand "virus" is not the right term, but virus is more general in terms of malicious program to most people.

[Vee_]

The definition of virus as Tim tells it is what i was taught in school(first semester of computer science) years ago. I remembered it well since that day because it was similar to a real life virus in that they replicate pretty well too.

Real life virus, hmmm....

[Vee_]

Technically, it's only a virus if it self replicates.

Technically, yeah. But as i said, virus is more general in terms of malicious program to most people.