Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

XP - RPC errors.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-26 23:01

Quick rundown, every 36 uptime hours, RPC decides close on me.('The Remote Procedure Call (RPC) service terminated unexpectedly.  It has done this 1 time(s). ...Event ID: 7034'-Event viewer). Did a clean install 5 weeks ago because the problem plagued my old install, and it's back. Other symptoms after the crash include, limited networking capabilities, inability to copy and paste, and inability to drag and drop icons. Done a deep system scan with Avast! and malware scans with SpybotS&D.
WinXP Professional 5.1 Service Pack 2 (Build #2600)

Any know what might be wrong?
[in before XP, fail, an hero]

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 1:32

How long after your new install did it take to come back?

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 19:04

About..say 4 weeks, a possibly a few times before that, but at more than 36 hours of uptime.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 21:09

Meh. Almost everything I've seen about this error indicates a virus . It's the calling card of the Blaster worm, but can be an indicator of some others as well. Fuck Avast, get norton or avg or pretty much anything else. Except for mcaffee.. fuck them too.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-28 5:55

Beat it with a hammer.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-28 6:07

>>4
Moron.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-28 10:35

>>4
I thought so to, but every time I did a scan specifically for the blaster worm the results returned nothing. Could it possibly be a hardware issue?

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-28 14:03

>>7
AVAST IS LESS WELL KNOWN THAN NORTON, AVG OR MCAFEE AND THEREFORE LIKELY HAS FEWER VIRII WITH RESISTANCES TO IT.

ALSO, YOU ARE A MORON FOR USING ANY ONE OF THE USELESS FOUR, GET OUT.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-28 18:35

>>8
'I did a scan specifically for the blaster worm'

http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2003-081119-5051-99

SPECIFICALLY, also did not state that I used Avast for that scan.

'AVAST IS LESS WELL KNOWN THAN NORTON, AVG OR MCAFEE AND THEREFORE LIKELY HAS FEWER VIRII WITH RESISTANCES TO IT.'

Isn't it better that fewer viruses have resistance to it?

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 6:21

>>9
OH SIR YOUR ENGLISH SKILLS ARE IMPECCABLE I WAS CALLING YOU A MORON FOR TAKING >>4`S ADVICE, WHICH WAS TO LOSE AVAST (MILDLY USEFUL), AND REPLACE IT WITH NORTON OR AVG (NEITHER OF WHICH DO FUCK ALL).

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 10:17

>>8
Avast also doesn't have the resources Norton, AVG, or McAfee do, so it likely knows about fewer viruses than any of those.
lrn2logic.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 13:46

>>11
BECAUSE BIG COMPANIES ALWAYS PRODUCE BETTER

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 14:45

>>12
Please review >>11's last line.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 16:00

>>13
DAMN I SUPPOSE THAT'S WHY I'M 3 TIMES MORE PRODUCTIVE ON MY DEBIAN, IT'S BECAUSE THE FSF AND THE GNU ARE BIG COMPANIES MAKING MONEY GET OUT DOUBLE NIGGER

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 17:09

>>14
Please review >>13.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 18:48

>>10

I was just replying to the 'It's the calling card of the Blaster worm, but can be an indicator of some others as well.' section of >>4 's post. Didn't switch off from Avast. Heh.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-02 6:08

bump

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-06 2:07

buuump

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-06 4:08

definetly blaster worm, but you have to find the right variant to get rid of it completely, good luck sir. :D


Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List