DonationCoder.com Software > Screenshot Captor

NOD32 False Positive

<< < (4/5) > >>

Carol Haynes:
Nirsoft stuff often causes false positives simply because of the utilities' functions. If you have an app that recovers passwords it can be used for password stealing if you are so inclined. Just shove all your Nirsoft stuff in a folder somewhere and tell your AV to ignore the folder.

tranglos:
Nirsoft stuff often causes false positives simply because of the utilities' functions. If you have an app that recovers passwords it can be used for password stealing if you are so inclined. Just shove all your Nirsoft stuff in a folder somewhere and tell your AV to ignore the folder.
-Carol Haynes (August 31, 2009, 05:39 PM)
--- End quote ---

Thanks, Carol, that makes sense.

Kaspersky tags these tools too, but it describes them better - as "hacking tools", while Avira displays some obscure name suggesting a virus or a trojan, and the link to more information always comes up empty. +1 for Kaspersky.

It's the first time I've tried Kaspersky and I like it a lot. I like the interface and the configurability. It's not exactly stingy when it comes to RAM usage (though better than Eset), and when performing a full scan, Kaspersky puts a bit of strain on the system. It seems to take 100% of one CPU core. Once mouse movement becomes shaky, it's not too good! I've looked for a process priority setting but can't find one.

Avira comes up on Bits du Jour in four days (looks like a 2 year license), while Kaspersky isn't cheap at all.

Decisions, decisions...

superboyac:
It's the first time I've tried Kaspersky and I like it a lot. I like the interface and the configurability. It's not exactly stingy when it comes to RAM usage (though better than Eset), and when performing a full scan, Kaspersky puts a bit of strain on the system. It seems to take 100% of one CPU core. Once mouse movement becomes shaky, it's not too good! I've looked for a process priority setting but can't find one.
-tranglos (September 01, 2009, 04:39 PM)
--- End quote ---
I've only done a full scan once.  Here's a question: what's the point of doing regularly scheduled full scans?  if you scan once and then have the program running a live scan afterwards, could something actually infect your computer withohut the live scanner catching it?  How could it go undetected by the live scanner and then be picked up by a full scan?  I've always wondered about that.  Also, when I did do scheduled scans, I obviously had them scheduled during times when I'd be sleeping.

Carol Haynes:
could something actually infect your computer withohut the live scanner catching it?
-superboyac (September 01, 2009, 05:04 PM)
--- End quote ---

Yes - if it is a new virus infiltrates your system before the AV vendor updates their virus database is updated. Future scans would detect it.

Trouble is it is a cat and mouse game.

It is unlikely that you will get a virus with decent AV software without regular full scans but not impossible - somebody has to be the one to identify a new virus! That is where heuristics are important - just a shame they aren't generally bright enough to be foolproof when it comes to false positive.

If you are looking for a free antivirus (i.e. for non-commercial use) the three I would choose in order of preferences are:

AVAST
Avira
AVG

I went off AVG a bit when the nag screens started and also had some clients with problems with network connections from AVG 8 upgrade from 7. I come across people who use it and they seem generally happy but I don't recommend it any more because of the number of issues I have encountered.

Avira is a good AV but I didn't really like the interface for the free version and it suffers from lots of false positives.

Avast hasn't caused me any problems so far on my laptop - light on resources and doesn't seem to to have bad false positives stats. There are no nag screen and it is pretty transparent in use.  I have recommended this to many home user clients and so far have not come across any issues or complaints. Avast is also very frequently updated (often 2 or 3 times a day).

tranglos:
I've only done a full scan once.  Here's a question: what's the point of doing regularly scheduled full scans?
-superboyac (September 01, 2009, 05:04 PM)
--- End quote ---

I always run a full scan after installing a new AV package, just to see if it comes up with anything. But you're right, there's not much point in doing it later, unless you expect an infection missed earlier.

The shaky mouse movement during full scan worries me somewhat, because it may reflect on the performance of real-time scan as well. And even when I selected "Objects scan" and "By extension", Kaspersky still seemed to be scanning *.pas files - that's weird, and I couldn't find a way to customize the list of extensions.

That said, with Kaspersky I see no perceptible delay when viewing or executing large apps, while with Eset there was always a small pause. I like it a lot so far.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page