Antiviruses and browser filters are a waste our time (we all know that but ... ) !
-
Do you know when your browser filter or your antivirus says: this file can harm your computer ? Well, people began to understand that these are false alarm signals. Because of this problem, no one trusts the browser filter and the antivirus (for a good reason). The problem arose from the moment VirusTotal appeared. All security companies take their files from there, and this is something totally wrong, because the files are uploaded by users like you and me ! Antivirus teams are like sheep, if one says that a file is suspect, then everyone says that the file is a virus or suspect. They do this so they don't lose the so-called "detection rate". That is why over ~90% of the files they detect as malware, they are in fact clean files, belonging to different legit software companies or belonging to you or me. So when your browser or antivirus tells you that the file "x" is infected, you should not listen to it. I've given up Google Chrome (mainly due to so called "malware" filters) and all antivirus software because these have told me that my programs (just compiled) were a threat to my computer. That is stupid, how can you interdict me to download my own statistical software because it might harm my computer ?! Source: http://vb6awards.blogspot.com[^]
-
Do you know when your browser filter or your antivirus says: this file can harm your computer ? Well, people began to understand that these are false alarm signals. Because of this problem, no one trusts the browser filter and the antivirus (for a good reason). The problem arose from the moment VirusTotal appeared. All security companies take their files from there, and this is something totally wrong, because the files are uploaded by users like you and me ! Antivirus teams are like sheep, if one says that a file is suspect, then everyone says that the file is a virus or suspect. They do this so they don't lose the so-called "detection rate". That is why over ~90% of the files they detect as malware, they are in fact clean files, belonging to different legit software companies or belonging to you or me. So when your browser or antivirus tells you that the file "x" is infected, you should not listen to it. I've given up Google Chrome (mainly due to so called "malware" filters) and all antivirus software because these have told me that my programs (just compiled) were a threat to my computer. That is stupid, how can you interdict me to download my own statistical software because it might harm my computer ?! Source: http://vb6awards.blogspot.com[^]
Wrong forum.
-
Do you know when your browser filter or your antivirus says: this file can harm your computer ? Well, people began to understand that these are false alarm signals. Because of this problem, no one trusts the browser filter and the antivirus (for a good reason). The problem arose from the moment VirusTotal appeared. All security companies take their files from there, and this is something totally wrong, because the files are uploaded by users like you and me ! Antivirus teams are like sheep, if one says that a file is suspect, then everyone says that the file is a virus or suspect. They do this so they don't lose the so-called "detection rate". That is why over ~90% of the files they detect as malware, they are in fact clean files, belonging to different legit software companies or belonging to you or me. So when your browser or antivirus tells you that the file "x" is infected, you should not listen to it. I've given up Google Chrome (mainly due to so called "malware" filters) and all antivirus software because these have told me that my programs (just compiled) were a threat to my computer. That is stupid, how can you interdict me to download my own statistical software because it might harm my computer ?! Source: http://vb6awards.blogspot.com[^]
A few years back, a client of over 10 years called to report major problems with our software...the shortcut couldn't find the executable. Her IT department had just rolled out a new AV and it apparently did not like our executable. I was able to FTP down a fresh executable, (via a remote) and tested it. When I double-clicked, the AV gave a warning and then poof, the file was gone! :wtf: The problem was referred to the IT dept. 'head' who totally believed that our files must be infected, even though the digital signature was still intact, and refused to set an exception or rule, or even to submit the file to AV for examination. The poor client was without their ordering and inventory system for 2 weeks until suddenly it just started working again...not sure what they did.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
-
A few years back, a client of over 10 years called to report major problems with our software...the shortcut couldn't find the executable. Her IT department had just rolled out a new AV and it apparently did not like our executable. I was able to FTP down a fresh executable, (via a remote) and tested it. When I double-clicked, the AV gave a warning and then poof, the file was gone! :wtf: The problem was referred to the IT dept. 'head' who totally believed that our files must be infected, even though the digital signature was still intact, and refused to set an exception or rule, or even to submit the file to AV for examination. The poor client was without their ordering and inventory system for 2 weeks until suddenly it just started working again...not sure what they did.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
Often, when an antivirus company says about an executable that is malicious, then they can destroy that legit company (they do this often with many small companies). The question is where is the justice in that ?! This is called unfair competition. I wonder when this situation will be resolved ... I am surprised that many antivirus companies are not sued.
-
A few years back, a client of over 10 years called to report major problems with our software...the shortcut couldn't find the executable. Her IT department had just rolled out a new AV and it apparently did not like our executable. I was able to FTP down a fresh executable, (via a remote) and tested it. When I double-clicked, the AV gave a warning and then poof, the file was gone! :wtf: The problem was referred to the IT dept. 'head' who totally believed that our files must be infected, even though the digital signature was still intact, and refused to set an exception or rule, or even to submit the file to AV for examination. The poor client was without their ordering and inventory system for 2 weeks until suddenly it just started working again...not sure what they did.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
I had this problem twice when our software had an auto-update capability. Essentially, the anti-virus scan had determined that my software could download and execute an installer (for the update.) It happened once when we used a third party toolkit for doing this, and again when we implemented the capability ourselves. The first 'fix' was to go to the anti-virus vendor and get onto a white-list. Unfortunately, we had to resubmit for every release, and this became impractical. The final solution was to eliminate the auto-update feature, just detecting when it was out of date and giving the user a link to download a new installer.
-
I had this problem twice when our software had an auto-update capability. Essentially, the anti-virus scan had determined that my software could download and execute an installer (for the update.) It happened once when we used a third party toolkit for doing this, and again when we implemented the capability ourselves. The first 'fix' was to go to the anti-virus vendor and get onto a white-list. Unfortunately, we had to resubmit for every release, and this became impractical. The final solution was to eliminate the auto-update feature, just detecting when it was out of date and giving the user a link to download a new installer.
-
Often, when an antivirus company says about an executable that is malicious, then they can destroy that legit company (they do this often with many small companies). The question is where is the justice in that ?! This is called unfair competition. I wonder when this situation will be resolved ... I am surprised that many antivirus companies are not sued.
Do you have any personal knowledge of any software companies "destroyed" or seriously financially damaged by the top-tier AV companies ? If so, how about a link to the evidence.
«I'm asked why doesn't C# implement feature X all the time. The answer's always the same: because no one ever designed, specified, implemented, tested, documented, shipped that feature. All six of those things are necessary to make a feature happen. They all cost huge amounts of time, effort and money.» Eric Lippert, Microsoft, 2009
-
Do you have any personal knowledge of any software companies "destroyed" or seriously financially damaged by the top-tier AV companies ? If so, how about a link to the evidence.
«I'm asked why doesn't C# implement feature X all the time. The answer's always the same: because no one ever designed, specified, implemented, tested, documented, shipped that feature. All six of those things are necessary to make a feature happen. They all cost huge amounts of time, effort and money.» Eric Lippert, Microsoft, 2009
-
A few years back, a client of over 10 years called to report major problems with our software...the shortcut couldn't find the executable. Her IT department had just rolled out a new AV and it apparently did not like our executable. I was able to FTP down a fresh executable, (via a remote) and tested it. When I double-clicked, the AV gave a warning and then poof, the file was gone! :wtf: The problem was referred to the IT dept. 'head' who totally believed that our files must be infected, even though the digital signature was still intact, and refused to set an exception or rule, or even to submit the file to AV for examination. The poor client was without their ordering and inventory system for 2 weeks until suddenly it just started working again...not sure what they did.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
kmoorevs wrote:
not sure what they did.
Probably used up some ammunition on the dic IT dept 'head'.
Geek code v 3.12 GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
-
yes, this is one: http://www.scutav.ro/[^] Scut AntiVirus is a legit antivirus made in 2008.
I asked you: "Do you have any personal knowledge of any software companies "destroyed" or seriously financially damaged by the top-tier AV companies ?" And, you responded with the name of an obscure Romanian maker of AV software, not the name of a software company seriously damaged by top-tier AV-software makers' software. Of course any naive user who installs more than one system-AV-checker is asking for a lot of grief: user stupidity never ceases. By the way, would you purchase a Spreadsheet named "Trash," or a DataBase named "Lossy" ? I think you are just blowing smoke in this thread.
«I'm asked why doesn't C# implement feature X all the time. The answer's always the same: because no one ever designed, specified, implemented, tested, documented, shipped that feature. All six of those things are necessary to make a feature happen. They all cost huge amounts of time, effort and money.» Eric Lippert, Microsoft, 2009
-
I asked you: "Do you have any personal knowledge of any software companies "destroyed" or seriously financially damaged by the top-tier AV companies ?" And, you responded with the name of an obscure Romanian maker of AV software, not the name of a software company seriously damaged by top-tier AV-software makers' software. Of course any naive user who installs more than one system-AV-checker is asking for a lot of grief: user stupidity never ceases. By the way, would you purchase a Spreadsheet named "Trash," or a DataBase named "Lossy" ? I think you are just blowing smoke in this thread.
«I'm asked why doesn't C# implement feature X all the time. The answer's always the same: because no one ever designed, specified, implemented, tested, documented, shipped that feature. All six of those things are necessary to make a feature happen. They all cost huge amounts of time, effort and money.» Eric Lippert, Microsoft, 2009
Perhaps you are not a security expert. The blog article posted here is entirely consistent with those observed by me, so I posted the aticle here too for I am sure I am not the only one who noticed this stuff in the browser filters and in the AV world. I'm sure you asked, and I gave you an answer that I know. The Scut AV could not begin sales in 2009 thanks to the Google Chrome filter. Users were scared to download the antivirus because Google Chrome said that "This file can harm your computer" and that was/is not the case. Thus, how can the user trust the antivirus ?! The antivirus is made by a friend of mine. I tested the product and it is really good on heuristics and in any case the Scut AV is no way a malware as Google says.