Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 06, 2016, 08:14:55 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: McAfee again. Don't ask.  (Read 14902 times)

app103

  • That scary taskbar girl
  • Global Moderator
  • Joined in 2006
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,666
    • View Profile
    • App's Apps
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #25 on: August 06, 2009, 01:58:27 PM »
I ditched AVG for Avast and I will admit it does freak out and give many more false positives.

Exmples:

A photoshop plugin I have had for many years will trigger it whenever I attempt to run Paintshop Pro. I can't remember which one it was. Wasn't one I use that often so I just got rid of the plugin to make it shut up and let me run PSP.

The game Magic Ball 2.

Older version of PS Tray Factory (annoyed me so much I paid to upgrade)

And it also went nuts every time I ran LBC after mouser's inclusion of nircmd. (I had to remove nircmd)

In most cases I can tell it to ignore and the application is somewhat usable until I run it again and have to again tell it to ignore whatever it is screaming about. (I can't seem to be able to tell Avast to ignore anything permanently. It just ignores the exclude list.)

The exception is Magic Ball 2, which is completely unplayable unless I turn Avast's background scanning off, before running it. I contacted Avast and even sent them a copy of the file, but they claim the file is "damaged" and therefore they aren't going to do anything about it. (it is not damaged) I have also contacted Alawar and let them know, but never heard anything back from them.


Innuendo

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,255
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #26 on: August 06, 2009, 04:14:06 PM »
Gosh, I think I'd be more inclined to trash the AV program that wouldn't work well with my programs rather than trash the programs that didn't work with the AV program.

False positives are a fact of life. Just about every AV program has one or two every once in a while, but if I can't tell the AV program to ignore it permanently then soon I'm going to be looking for a new way to scan for viruses.

cyberdiva

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 982
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #27 on: August 06, 2009, 10:18:30 PM »
Gosh, I think I'd be more inclined to trash the AV program that wouldn't work well with my programs rather than trash the programs that didn't work with the AV program.
I'm not sure whether this is in response to what I said about getting rid of Online Armor, but I think I should explain that I received a registered copy for free in some special offer.  I was simply trying it out.  There was a lot I didn't like about it--e.g., it slowed down my computer, and it tried to be an anti-malware and an anti-virus program (although it was supposed to be just a firewall) and interfered with other programs I have for those functions.  It turned out to be incompatible with McAfee, but that was only one of the reasons I got rid of it.

BTW, I think I have less patience with false positives than you do.  They make me waste lots of time and they raise my angst level.  Any program that reports a false positive more than once in a blue moon is a program I think seriously about replacing.

Innuendo

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,255
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #28 on: August 07, 2009, 08:56:33 AM »
I'm not sure whether this is in response to what I said about getting rid of Online Armor, but I think I should explain that I received a registered copy for free in some special offer.

Oh, no. I was replying to April & didn't think quoting was necessary because I was posting right below her. She got rid of a PaintShop Pro plugin, a game, a program included with one of Mouser's program, and upgraded another program all in the name of keeping McAfee happy. I don't think I would have been so understanding of McAfee's inability to play nice with others.

Quote
There was a lot I didn't like about it--e.g., it slowed down my computer, and it tried to be an anti-malware and an anti-virus program (although it was supposed to be just a firewall) and interfered with other programs I have for those functions.

I've never used Online Armor, but it definitely has caused some people problems on their systems. Heck, it was on Giveaway Of The Day recently and the comments section was filled with people who still felt like they were ripped off even though they paid nothing for it.  :D

Agnitum as a free version of their Outpost firewall program that has been well received. It's the only firewall besides Online Armor that scores 100% in leak tests.

Quote
BTW, I think I have less patience with false positives than you do.  They make me waste lots of time and they raise my angst level.

Can't be having that or you'd have to be emailing Mouser and having him change your forum name to EmoDiva or something similar.

Quote
Any program that reports a false positive more than once in a blue moon is a program I think seriously about replacing.

Sometimes false positives are not really false. One example of this is some security software. Some anti-malware programs will flag them because they can be used for bad as well as good. Another thing to consider is the context of the alert. I had to set up a keylogger for a client who needed to see what some wayward employee wase up to on a company PC. His anti-malware program immediately flagged it as Generic.PS (Password Stealer). Of course, a keylogger could be used to steal passwords so that was a valid alarm even though the program was on the computer for a valid purpose.

cyberdiva

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 982
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #29 on: August 08, 2009, 02:31:32 PM »
Oh, no. I was replying to April & didn't think quoting was necessary because I was posting right below her. She got rid of a PaintShop Pro plugin, a game, a program included with one of Mouser's program, and upgraded another program all in the name of keeping McAfee happy. I don't think I would have been so understanding of McAfee's inability to play nice with others.
Oh, I see.  I agree with you.

Quote
Agnitum as a free version of their Outpost firewall program that has been well received. It's the only firewall besides Online Armor that scores 100% in leak tests.
Thanks for the suggestion about Agnitum.  I'm still running Sygate, and while I think it still works pretty well, I wouldn't at all mind having a program that's being kept up.  I may give Agnitum a try.

Quote
Can't be having that or you'd have to be emailing Mouser and having him change your forum name to EmoDiva or something similar.
What a great idea!  :D

Quote
Sometimes false positives are not really false. One example of this is some security software. Some anti-malware programs will flag them because they can be used for bad as well as good. Another thing to consider is the context of the alert. I had to set up a keylogger for a client who needed to see what some wayward employee wase up to on a company PC. His anti-malware program immediately flagged it as Generic.PS (Password Stealer). Of course, a keylogger could be used to steal passwords so that was a valid alarm even though the program was on the computer for a valid purpose.
Yes, I see your point.  However, as EmoDiva, I exaggerate,  and I write first, think later  >:D

Innuendo

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,255
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #30 on: August 09, 2009, 10:42:31 AM »
Thanks for the suggestion about Agnitum.  I'm still running Sygate, and while I think it still works pretty well, I wouldn't at all mind having a program that's being kept up.  I may give Agnitum a try.

If you are wanting 'just a firewall' it'd be a good fit as all the premium features you expressed an interest in definitely not having are reserved for their commercial Outpost Pro product. It should be a good fit for you.

I remember when Sygate was among the best of the best. It was hard to beat by any measure. However, Symantec has a long history of buying great companies who published great products and then churning out some half-baked solution using a parody solution of the once great technology.

Quote
Yes, I see your point.  However, as EmoDiva, I exaggerate,  and I write first, think later  >:D

I can't wait to see the new EmoDiva avatar!  ;D

mwb1100

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,522
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #31 on: August 09, 2009, 05:44:01 PM »
However, Symantec has a long history of buying great companies who published great products and then churning out some half-baked solution using a parody solution of the once great technology.

This seems like a problem for almost any acquisition made by a large software company.  It would be nice if an acquisition like this happened and the parent company just said to the original developers, "Here's a somewhat bigger budget - do more of what you've been doing".  But it seems like the bigger guys always think they can do it better.

Innuendo

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,255
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #32 on: August 10, 2009, 07:38:53 AM »
But it seems like the bigger guys always think they can do it better.

However, Symantec doesn't even try to do it better. They have the anti-Midas touch. That means they can turn gold into crap. Take, for example, the program ATGuard. It was a great firewall with neat stuff like ad-blocking, cookie management, and such built in.

Well, one day Symantec bought the rights to it & rather than keep it in its lean form with optimized performance and speed they rolled the technology into their bloated security suite and if that wasn't bad enough, they installed a ruleset for the firewall to let through all traffic (including ads, coolies, etc.) from all of their advertising partners! There was no way to delete these rules or even see that the rules existed from within the program. One had to trudge through the directory structure and root out the ruleset files manually....provided a person even knew they existed.

Despicable company, IMHO.

app103

  • That scary taskbar girl
  • Global Moderator
  • Joined in 2006
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,666
    • View Profile
    • App's Apps
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #33 on: August 11, 2009, 03:14:56 AM »
Oh, no. I was replying to April & didn't think quoting was necessary because I was posting right below her. She got rid of a PaintShop Pro plugin, a game, a program included with one of Mouser's program, and upgraded another program all in the name of keeping McAfee happy. I don't think I would have been so understanding of McAfee's inability to play nice with others.

Some corrections:

I got rid of McAfee about 6 years ago when I traced some odd system instability issues to it. I haven't used it since. I once thought my WinME totally sucked because it would either lock up or BSOD about every four hours. After getting rid of McAfee, I could keep it running (and running quite well I must add) for at least a week, and up to about 2 months without any issues.

Right after ditching it, I took the advice of someone I respected and installed AVG, which I continued to use on all of my PC's up until recently.

I ditched AVG after an issue with my daughter's laptop and some nasty malware it failed to detect. I didn't feel like I could trust it any more. I would rather false positives than false negatives.

My current AV is Avast. I am sure there has to be some way of getting it to behave and honor the exceptions list but I can't seem to figure it out.

The photoshop plugin was not a loss, wasn't used very much over the years, in fact I can't remember using it at all within the last 5.

The software I upgraded should have been upgraded any way, because that is just the smart thing to do. Only reason why I never did was related to a money issue. That version had some issues with triggering false positives in a few different AV's and not just Avast. I knew this and when it started happening in AVG I chose to just add to exceptions list and go on with my life. When it happened in Avast too, I contemplated upgrading, and the fact I couldn't figure out how the ignore list works in Avast, just drove me to finally do it. It's not something I regret. Newer version works much better than the old...less buggy. I really don't mind the extra rice & beans I had to eat to pay for it.

nircmd was not something I wanted or needed in LBC to begin with, and removing it was no loss to me. In fact, I have recommended that mouser offer it as a separate download in order to avoid issues like this, and warn users that it could trigger an AV alert. This extra tool should be optional and not included by default.

And as far as the game goes, I didn't get rid of it. I happen to like it too much and don't plan on getting rid of it until I at least beat all the levels.  The graphics are awesome and the game boards are a blast. It makes me laugh. I love doing things like destroying train tracks and sending cows flying into the sky. It's one of the better breakout style games I have played. :D

Screenshot - 8_11_2009 , 4_12_16 AM.pngMcAfee again. Don't ask.

superboyac

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,070
  • Is your software in my list?
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: McAfee again. Don't ask.
« Reply #34 on: August 11, 2009, 12:17:13 PM »
McAfee is terrible.  It wasn't able to catch a really bad malware/virus called "Advanced Virus Removal".  This is the enterprise edition of mcAfee.  horrible antivirus solution.  It really did a number on my computer.  I'll continue using Kaspersky when i have the choice.  For me, the choice is between kaspersky and NOD32, and I use kaspersky because it's cheaper for me and i think it's more configurable than NOD32.  Although, a lot of people claim that NOD32 is lighter on resources and overall very efficient.