When viewing many of my pictures through Windows Photo Gallery, I get a
security risk on my Norton from a file called Bloodhound.Exploit.13...I
looked it up, and it is the result of a corrupting of the JPEG file...is
there a Update for Vista that alleviates this problem?

I have the same problem. What is the fix? Symantec won't help unless I pay
100$ my computer is only 3 days old...it's so frustrating...No solution in
site

"Kevin" wrote:

> When viewing many of my pictures through Windows Photo Gallery, I get a
> security risk on my Norton from a file called Bloodhound.Exploit.13...I
> looked it up, and it is the result of a corrupting of the JPEG file...is
> there a Update for Vista that alleviates this problem?

I get this from McAfee with one old jpg file. McAfee's been checking this
file for 5-6 years, and just now thinks it found something? I just ignore
it.



"Louis" <Louis@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:67C1C88E-7770-442E-A26E-027AB824319A@microsoft.com...
>I have the same problem. What is the fix? Symantec won't help unless I pay
> 100$ my computer is only 3 days old...it's so frustrating...No solution in
> site
>
> "Kevin" wrote:
>
>> When viewing many of my pictures through Windows Photo Gallery, I get a
>> security risk on my Norton from a file called Bloodhound.Exploit.13...I
>> looked it up, and it is the result of a corrupting of the JPEG file...is
>> there a Update for Vista that alleviates this problem?

On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 09:02:01 -0700, Louis
<Louis@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>I have the same problem. What is the fix? Symantec won't help unless I pay
>100$ my computer is only 3 days old...it's so frustrating...No solution in
>site
>
>"Kevin" wrote:
>
>> When viewing many of my pictures through Windows Photo Gallery, I get a
>> security risk on my Norton from a file called Bloodhound.Exploit.13...I
>> looked it up, and it is the result of a corrupting of the JPEG file...is
>> there a Update for Vista that alleviates this problem?


Most likely a false positive. If the file has a virus inside (rare and
difficult to do for image files) then your anti-virus should have
flagged it. If Norton DID flag it, then I would run a different
anti-virus on it and see if it too raises a security threat for the
same file. AVG is free and fast.

If you get "many" warning chances are good Norton is full of... well
you know. ;-)

Is it also possible that WPG itself , or rather its markers, is the virus?
I've stopped using WPG because it has a bad habit of corrupting jpgs by
writing its own markers over those placed there by the software that created
the image (eg. camera software, etc).

"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:2igs93htnmq584nhp5ficpieg2d0hhv6sl@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 09:02:01 -0700, Louis
> <Louis@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>I have the same problem. What is the fix? Symantec won't help unless I
>>pay
>>100$ my computer is only 3 days old...it's so frustrating...No solution in
>>site
>>
>>"Kevin" wrote:
>>
>>> When viewing many of my pictures through Windows Photo Gallery, I get a
>>> security risk on my Norton from a file called Bloodhound.Exploit.13...I
>>> looked it up, and it is the result of a corrupting of the JPEG file...is
>>> there a Update for Vista that alleviates this problem?
>
>
> Most likely a false positive. If the file has a virus inside (rare and
> difficult to do for image files) then your anti-virus should have
> flagged it. If Norton DID flag it, then I would run a different
> anti-virus on it and see if it too raises a security threat for the
> same file. AVG is free and fast.
>
> If you get "many" warning chances are good Norton is full of... well
> you know. ;-)
>

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:05:14 +1000, "Greg" <greg.munro@bigpond.com>
wrote:

>Is it also possible that WPG itself , or rather its markers, is the virus?
>I've stopped using WPG because it has a bad habit of corrupting jpgs by
>writing its own markers over those placed there by the software that created
>the image (eg. camera software, etc).

WPG is pretty raw so far, who knows what's going on with it. Lots of
people have reported various color casts from green to yellow to just
darker all due to it using color management which apparently gets
tripped up with certain Color profiles depending on your graphic card
and or monitor. I haven't see any of that myself thank goodness.

Adam:
I am having the exact problem you describe. I took 169 picturs today for my
job and when i download them 2 dozen had the problems you described. The all
started when I got a new Hp computer with Vista Home Premium. I downloades
the same photos to my XP laptop and no problems. I even transfered them from
the XP laptop to the Vista desktop and they were fine. I tried another camera
and put the memory car in the desktop reader and they were corrupt. I use
these photos foy my job and can't have the ruined by Vista. Any idea what the
problem is?

"Adam Albright" wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:05:14 +1000, "Greg" <greg.munro@bigpond.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Is it also possible that WPG itself , or rather its markers, is the virus?
> >I've stopped using WPG because it has a bad habit of corrupting jpgs by
> >writing its own markers over those placed there by the software that created
> >the image (eg. camera software, etc).
>
> WPG is pretty raw so far, who knows what's going on with it. Lots of
> people have reported various color casts from green to yellow to just
> darker all due to it using color management which apparently gets
> tripped up with certain Color profiles depending on your graphic card
> and or monitor. I haven't see any of that myself thank goodness.
>
>