<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>








<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rss="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/">
   <channel rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/gibbs.html">
      <title>Virus and worm news from Network World</title>
      <link>http://www.nwfusion.com/topics/virus.html</link>
      <description>The latest virus and worm news and analysis from NetworkWorld.com.</description>
      <dc:publisher>Network World, Inc.</dc:publisher>
      <dc:rights>Copyright(C) 1994 - 2009 Network World, Inc.</dc:rights>
      <image rdf:resource="http://www.networkworld.com/redesign2/logorss.gif"></image>
	  											<items>
															 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/112509-four-years-not-enough-for.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
												 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-panda-antivirus-pro-2010-a.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
												 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-bitdefender-antivirus.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
												 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-kaspersky-anti-virus.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
												 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-symantec-norton-antivirus.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
												 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-top-protection-g-data-antivirus.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
												 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/112409-advanced.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
												 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-alwil-avast-professional.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
												 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-mcafee-virusscan-plus.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
												 								<rdf:Seq>
					<rdf:li resource="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-eset.html"/>
				</rdf:Seq>
										</items>
							   </channel>
   																 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/112509-four-years-not-enough-for.html">
					<title>Four Years Not Enough for &apos;Godfather of Spam&apos;</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/112509-four-years-not-enough-for.html</link>
					<description>Is four years and a $250,000 fine really the best punishment for the self-proclaimed &quot;Godfather of Spam?&quot; Put another way: Do we take the criminal aspects of spam seriously enough?</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			David Coursey</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-25T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
												 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-panda-antivirus-pro-2010-a.html">
					<title>Panda Antivirus Pro 2010: A Fair Performer</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-panda-antivirus-pro-2010-a.html</link>
					<description>Panda Antivirus Pro 2010 ($50 for a one-year, three-PC license) ranks fifth in our current roundup of 11 stand-alone antivirus apps. It was buoyed by positives such as strong traditional malware detection, but dragged down by negatives like poor behavioral scans.</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			Erik Larkin</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-24T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
												 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-bitdefender-antivirus.html">
					<title>BitDefender Antivirus 2010</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-bitdefender-antivirus.html</link>
					<description>BitDefender Antivirus ($30 for a one-year, three-PC license) holds its own at dealing with malware, but its interface isn&apos;t especially user-friendly. Overall the program earned fourth place in our roundup of stand-alone antivirus programs.</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			Erik Larkin</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-24T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
												 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-kaspersky-anti-virus.html">
					<title>Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2010</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-kaspersky-anti-virus.html</link>
					<description>Kaspersky&apos;s third-place ranking in our roundup of stand-alone antivirus programs reflects its ability both to impress and to disappoint. It pairs competent proactive protection with below-average signature detection, and a strong feature set with an at-times annoying user experience.</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			Erik Larkin</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-24T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
												 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-symantec-norton-antivirus.html">
					<title>Symantec Norton AntiVirus 2010</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-symantec-norton-antivirus.html</link>
					<description>Symantec&apos;s Norton AntiVirus ($40 for a one-year, single-PC license) offers some terrific extra features and a polished user interface. But subpar performance in one detection category prevented it from capturing the top spot in our chart of stand-alone antivirus programs.</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			Erik Larkin</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-24T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
												 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-top-protection-g-data-antivirus.html">
					<title>Top Protection: G Data AntiVirus 2010</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-top-protection-g-data-antivirus.html</link>
					<description>Most security programs use a single antivirus engine, but the German-made G Data ($25 for a one-year, single-PC license, as of 11/20/09) uses two separate engines: BitDefender and Avast. That double coverage may have helped it rack up an impressive 99.95 percent block rate for traditional, signature-based detection of known malware, a rate better than that of any other app we tested. It was likewise strong at blocking annoying adware, running up a 99.8 percent score, and these strengths helped it earn top billing.</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			Erik Larkin</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-24T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
												 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/112409-advanced.html">
					<title>Advanced Antivirus</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/112409-advanced.html</link>
					<description>Today&apos;s vast threatscape of duplicitous Trojan horses, invisible exploits, and slithering worms make antivirus protection a must. But that doesn&apos;t mean you have to pay top dollar for a security suite that may have features you don&apos;t want or need.</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			Erik Larkin, Testing By and Andreas Marx</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-24T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
												 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-alwil-avast-professional.html">
					<title>Alwil Avast Professional Edition</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-alwil-avast-professional.html</link>
					<description>Though Alwil Avast Professional Edition ($40 for a one-year, single-PC license, as of 11/23/09) has a speedy scan rate, that wasn&apos;t enough to offset its unimpressive protection from malware infections and its truly annoying interface. With a last-place showing in our stand-alone antivirus rankings, it&apos;s clearly a less than ideal choice for your paid protection. (A new version is coming early next year--see the end of this review.)</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			Erik Larkin</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-24T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
												 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-mcafee-virusscan-plus.html">
					<title>McAfee VirusScan Plus 2010</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-mcafee-virusscan-plus.html</link>
					<description>McAfee VirusScan Plus ($40 for a one-year, single-PC license, as of 11/19/09) does well with traditional, signature-based malware detection, but it delivered a large number of false positives and fumbled on essentials like proactive protection and scan speed. Overall, it ranked tenth out of the 11 products in our roundup of stand-alone antivirus programs.</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			Erik Larkin</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-24T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
												 												                                      
								<item rdf:about="http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-eset.html">
					<title>ESET NOD32</title>
					<link>http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2009/112409-eset.html</link>
					<description>ESET NOD32 has some nice, techie-focused extras and it effectively ferrets out rootkits, but it can&apos;t keep up with other antivirus apps when it comes to the essential task of blocking malware. It came in ninth place out of 11 in our current ranking of stand-alone antivirus software.</description>
					<dc:creator>			
			 		 			Erik Larkin</dc:creator>
					<dc:date>2009-11-24T12:00:00-04:00</dc:date>
			   	</item>
							</rdf:RDF>
