Avast WEBforum
Consumer Products => Avast Free Antivirus / Premium Security (legacy Pro Antivirus, Internet Security, Premier) => Topic started by: Henrique - RJ on May 25, 2006, 12:20:05 AM
-
I have sent for email malicious archives for virus@avast.com
with the purpose of that they are detected by avast!
Because the malicosos archives that sending are not include
in the detention of avast! being they in fact malwares?
???
-
Henrique, they will be analised and, if they are really infected (malware) they will be included in the next virus databases updates.
The most dangerous, the most spread over Internet, the fast should be the update...
I'm not sure if this is what you've asked ::)
Welcome to avast forums 8)
-
But I sent the malicious archives (4 or 5) in April (he makes one month)… ??? ???
(http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/1097/imagemvx6.jpg)
-
But I sent the malicious archives (4 or 5) in April (he makes one month)… ??? ???
You're right...
Please, avast team... shame :P
-
It may be a while this has happened before and I wish Alwil would speed it up a little.
@Henrique - RJ
Try submitting the file to www.virustotal.com this will scan it with multiple scanners and send the file to the company so if this is a new unknown threat it will be found, and if this is a threat that is going around the antivirus programs that do not detect it will get it and hopefully add it to the detections.
-
What I can make?
justin1278,
All the archives had been submitted to the VirusTotal.
All are malicious...
-
Ok then you know for a fact it is malware, now all we need is for Alwil to add detections to avast.
-
Ok then you know for a fact it is malware, now all we need is for Alwil to add detections to avast.
But the Alwil ignores the malicious archives (avast! it does not detect). It sees that the archives had been sent by email the Alwil and also distributed by the VirusTotal. This makes much time…
What I can make?
-
I'm all for quick responses (why can't everyone be like Kaspersky in that regard?), but more important than that is to avoid the behavior that is causing you to encounter so much malware in the first place. (Unless you're actively seeking it out, which I doubt.)
-
I'm all for quick responses (why can't everyone be like Kaspersky in that regard?), but more important than that is to avoid the behavior that is causing you to encounter so much malware in the first place. (Unless you're actively seeking it out, which I doubt.)
Almost all my malicious archives had been gotten from diverse research in fóruns with the end to test antivirus.
These archives had been tested in the VirusTotal and therefore distributeds for several antivirus (between them avast! ).
This proves that the Alwil is not examining the archives that are distributeds by the VirusTotal and that avast! he is being wronged in its detention of new virus.
Last sunday I tested an archive (linda2.scr) in the VirusTotal and less than six hours later Kaspersky started to detect it. They see the examinations below.
Post in fórum to try here to communicate this fact á Alwil (I sent email for support@avast.com).
(http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/3238/linda3ma.jpg)
(http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/9924/linda20xz.jpg)
Archive the same tested today (avast! it continues not detecting as well as others antivirus). I ask for to special attention á column “Update” (they see the dates of update).
avast! it goes badly…
(http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/8118/linda31ri.jpg)
-
To RJ
If you feel anxious about file?
Maleware detect to file must mostly delete it.
You make yourself.
If it is file about program >> To uninstall & reinstall program now.
Maleware should clear because it not spread out to other file.
Mostly Antivirus program will protect maleware because some maleware very damage data with virus form internet .
But if it spread out is no maleware.
-
I sent again the archive today “linda2.scr” for virus@avast.com.
Now I go to wait days to see if this malicious archive will be detected by avast!
-
You help for Avast and other users.
I and you waiting for it and update database.
-
You help for Avast and other users.
I and you waiting for it and update database.
Yes, my objective is to improve avast!
Below the content of the message that was sent for virus@avast.com
together with the malicious archive.
>>:_CHEST_ANALYZE_:<<
Virus name:
Original file location: C:\WINDOWS\Desktop\linda2.scr
Computer name: P7K7O7
Transfer time: 21.05.2006 11:41:16
Modification time: 17.05.2006 22:08:00
Total size: 168256
Comment:
File ID: 37
Category: 2
OS:
Microsoft Windows Me
linda2.scr it's infected by:
DrWeb: DLOADER.Trojan
Kaspersky: Trojan-Downloader.Win32.Banload.apv
Ewido: Downloader.Banload.apv
McAfee: PWS-Banker.gen.i
Please visit:
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=1e2eefa3cfbe88be87fe85afc77ed50e&topic=21304.0
-
Two months if had passed and linda2.scr continues not being detected for avast!
They see the email sent for Alwil (Vlk):
Well, we're periodically downloading them and processing them.
It may just take some time...
Ondrej Vlcek
lead program manager
ALWIL Software
+420 604 225305
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henrique
> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 7:29 PM
> To: Ondrej Vlcek
> Subject: Re: VirusTotal
>
> Hello Ondrej,
>
> Thank you for your reply.
>
> But because files malicious (they are more than 10 that I have)
> that I test in the VirusTotal are not examined by the Alwil if
> avast! it continues not detecting them?
>
>
> Henrique Felgueiras
> Rio de Janeiro -
> Brazil
>
> -----Mensagem Original-----
> De: "Ondrej Vlcek" <vlk@asw.cz>
> Para: "'Henrique'"
> Enviada em: segunda-feira, 26 de junho de 2006 03:45
> Assunto: RE: VirusTotal
>
>
> Hi Henrique,
>
> all I can say about this is that we're getting samples from
> many sources, and VirusTotal is one of them.
>
> So it's not true that we're not examining files from VT.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Ondrej Vlcek
> lead program manager
> ALWIL Software
> +420 604 225305
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Henrique
> > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 8:34 AM
> > To: vlk@avast.com
> > Subject: VirusTotal
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Please,
> >
> > I use avast! Home Edition and would like to know because
> > Alwil it has not examined files that they are distributed by the
> > VirusTotal ?
> >
> > What if it can make so that the Alwil examines files distributed by
> > VirusTotal ?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > Henrique Felgueiras
> > Rio
> de
> > Janeiro - Brazil
> >
> >
-
Simply amazing
This thread was started on 5-24 - almost 2 month ago.
It's alread been read over 700 times.
It's been spread all over the internet
and still not one single reply from Alwil ???
-
Simply amazing
This thread was started on 5-24 - almost 2 month ago.
It's alread been read over 700 times.
It's been spread all over the internet
and still not one single reply from Alwil???
SHAME :P :P :P
-
I know what you mean, I've had three instances with a file I've received by e-mail over the last three weeks.
Avast finds nothing wrong with the attachment, ewido finds Email-Worm.Win32.Jubon.a, so does jotti. I've sent it from the chest, I've also sent it by e-mail to virus@avast.com.
It still isn't being detected.
-
Finally !!!!!!
File linda2.scr today was detected by avast!
Last week I tested in the VirusTotal all files malicious ( also linda2.scr ) of the quarentine of avast! e that until then was not detected.
Still they lack to be detected by avast! others files as for example: abrir_fotos.scr, battlefield.exe, fotos.scr ...
They see the image below:
(http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/5374/avastmt2.jpg)
-
Geeeeeeee look like Awil gonna need a bigger virus research laboratory and a bigger anti-virus swats staff team to speed up quick.
I hope their not on holidays. :'( or left the company without further help or a replacement team. ???
-
Update:
Email-Worm.Win32.Jubon is now being detected by todays update.
Thanks Avast! team.
-
Update:
Email-Worm.Win32.Jubon is now being detected by todays update.
Thanks Avast! team.
Hello marc57
Between the sending and the detection of the Email.Worm.Win32.Jubon how much time passed ?
Today after update fotos.scr was detected ( more than one week ).
It is important that the Alwil examines the distribution for the VirusTotal or Jotti. Thus we will have one avast! powerful.
-
Alwil gets feedback from Jotti and Virus Total on undetected Malware.
-
Alwil gets feedback from Jotti and Virus Total on undetected Malware.
Then why is it taking so long to update the virus database ??
I guess that's something Alwil will have to answer except,
I've not seen any one from Alwil in this thread even though they are the only
ones who can answer some of these questions. :'( :'( :'(
-
Then why is it taking so long to update the virus database ??
I guess that's something Alwil will have to answer except,
I've not seen any one from Alwil in this thread even though they are the only
ones who can answer some of these questions. :'( :'( :'(
I fully agree...
There are, at least, two ways to answer this kind of thread:
1) with fact: making a better product, improving detection and submition, etc.
2) posting here and not only 'listen' to the users (if anybody is listening :'().
-
We now have a full-time employee who's looking after the virus@avast.com mailbox. Hence most of the submissions are now processed in a timely fashion (at least much faster than previously).
Jotti & VirusTotal are something very different though. Maybe you don't realize it, but some 80% of stuff we're getting from these sources is JUNK. It's not a very good source of samples indeed...
-
Thanks Vlk for the comeback. That extra employee in the right spot
should help a great deal. Thanks :)
-
Update:
Email-Worm.Win32.Jubon is now being detected by todays update.
Thanks Avast! team.
Hello marc57
Between the sending and the detection of the Email.Worm.Win32.Jubon how much time passed ?
Today after update fotos.scr was detected ( more than one week ).
It is important that the Alwil examines the distribution for the VirusTotal or Jotti. Thus we will have one avast! powerful.
Hey Henrique,
I started sending this to Avast about three weeks ago.
-
Update:
Email-Worm.Win32.Jubon is now being detected by todays update.
Thanks Avast! team.
Hello marc57
Between the sending and the detection of the Email.Worm.Win32.Jubon how much time passed ?
Today after update fotos.scr was detected ( more than one week ).
It is important that the Alwil examines the distribution for the VirusTotal or Jotti. Thus we will have one avast! powerful.
Hey Henrique,
I started sending this to Avast about three weeks ago.
My God… Three weeks? It is an eternity….
Hey Vlk,
Junk 80% ? But 20% are malwares !!!!
Kaspersky examines all and in few hours it creates the signatures.
-
Such instances make one wonder if Avast is giving sufficient protection.
I have been trialling F-Secure on my laptop. I doubt that I am going to keep it after the trial period, and one of the options is Avast Home. This thread does not give one much confidence, does it?
Best,
Jerry
-
Junk 80% ? But 20% are malwares !!!!
Kaspersky examines all and in few hours it creates the signatures.
Wrong :)
But appearently, you know more people in their virus lab then me, so you know better. ;)
Such instances make one wonder if Avast is giving sufficient protection.
I have been trialling F-Secure on my laptop. I doubt that I am going to keep it after the trial period, and one of the options is Avast Home. This thread does not give one much confidence, does it?
You must realize one thing, and that is, prioritization of samples. Some samples require immediate attention, and usually cause a release of an extra VPS (e.g. 30 minutes after we receive the sample), some are medium priority and are usually processed in the timeframe of days, and some are low-priority samples, and these usually get batch processed once in a couple of weeks (may change to once a week in the near future).
To decide what is high/moderate/low priority is up to the experience of the virus analyst, of course (so there may be human mistakes). But I find it ridiculous when someone comes here and starts saying that this and that product processes all samples in a couple of hours, because it's simply not true (and, indeed, is not even desirable).
If you want to determine the detection rates of a given product, use the results of a respectfull test (e.g. IBK's www.av-comparatives.org).
Thanks
Vlk
Thanks
Vlk
-
Such instances make one wonder if Avast is giving sufficient protection.
Just what is sufficient protection - how is it defined?
This thread does not give one much confidence, does it?
How do you measure confidence?
We bandy about these terms with abandon in these discussions as if they have anything other than emotional meaning.
I am grateful for all the self-proclaimed experts telling avast how to do a better job - both technically and in how to run their business - I am sure the avast team must find the advice most helpful. I hope and believe that some of the advice is helping avast be a better product.
However, I look at the price point and I look at on the ground experience. The price point of the home version cannot be beaten. For the two years that I and those I support have been using avast there has been no instance of infection not found by avast that have infected our systems or been detected by the other layered scans that we use - but avast is and has been the resident antivirus.
Sure we could have paid a lot of money over the past two years for a better rated antivirus product - and it would have given us nothing, zero, zilch above and beyond the protection afforded us by avast.
If threads are going to apply terms like "confidence" and "sufficient protection" to avast then the (albeit small) community I represent does have "confidence" and our experience is of "sufficient protection" from avast.
Of course, the instant it lets something through that hurts us - you can bet I will be in here complaining as loudly as anyone (but I do have additional defence layers in case it happens - do you?).
-
I do agree that the best measure of effectiveness that is easily available are the results of AV Comparatives tests. Those tests give Avast good marks.
If the Jotti's tests are worth anything, however, then it is apparent that Avast lags. Just for my own information, I took 20 of Jotti's tests results as they came out, and I saw them. Of the 7 AVs Avast had the worst detection record, detecting only 4 out of the 20. The two best were KAV with 12 detections and Dr Web with 11.
While I will not argue that those are not the best tests, if they are worth anything then Avast is slow at adding the malware to their base.
There is nothinthing emotional about this. It is based upon data whether one considers it good or not. The experience of users is also worth considering. That is what we are doing here.
Regards,
Jerry
-
There is nothinthing emotional about this. It is based upon data whether one considers it good or not.
There are times you have to consider what kind of data is used. I personally don't care if avast! doesn't detect some
virus that hasn't been around in ages.
I do care if I'm not protected from what's currently in the wild.
Up till now, avast! has NOT let me down.
When it does, you'll all know..... ;D
You also can't trust just one program to be your total arsenal of protection.
-
If the Jotti's tests are worth anything, however, then it is apparent that Avast lags. Just for my own information, I took 20 of Jotti's tests results as they came out, and I saw them. Of the 7 AVs Avast had the worst detection record, detecting only 4 out of the 20. The two best were KAV with 12 detections and Dr Web with 11.
I don't understand; Jotti uses 15 engines, not 7.
Anyway, I think it's ALWAYS a bad idea to use Jotti's immediate results to judge ANY detection rate. Here's why:
1. you don't know what the files are like. They can be false positives. They can be trashed samples. Anything. And as I said, indeed, about 80% of what we're getting from VT/Jotti is actually junk.
2. Even if all the samples were OK (which is not the case), Jotti uses the linux versions of the engines. But e.g. in the case of avast, the linux version has considerably lower detection rates because of lack of many unpackers. For this reason, it's always better to use VirusTotal (which uses Windows engines) to verify if certain file is/isn't picked by avast.
Thanks
Vlk
-
BTW I just visited Jotti's web site and here's what it shows for the last infected file.
Lack of detection? I don't think so... :)
-
BTW I just visited Jotti's web site and here's what it shows for the last infected file.
Lack of detection? I don't think so... :)
Hi Vlk,
I just kept up with 7; BD, Avast, KAV, NOD, Antivir, Dr Web, and AVG.
I did not select the tests in order to prove anything, but wanted to know how the various AVs did. I was, frankly, wondering how BD compared with KAV and NOD.
Of the 20 tests that I noted at random none detected them all for whatever reason.
BD- 5
Avast-4
KAV-12
NOD-9
Antivir-8
Dr Web-11
AVG-7
If one wanted to select the tests to prove his point he could always find some which would show his choice detected more than the rest. However, that was not my purpose, and in this case I was not especially interested in Avast.
But the results are what they were. I do not think that the Jottis results are nearly enough to sway the selection of an AV.
I just now looked and in this case the only AV that caught the sample was Kaspersky. That does not prove much because it happened once. However, there is some legitimate consideration if multiple tests are considered.
There are better indicators than Jottis, but it is worth considering, especially in the area of how fast updates to signatures are made.
Best,
Jerry
-
especially in the area of how fast updates to signatures are made.
Only if the sample is a legitamate contender for an update.
Most items or a least a gread deal of them aren't.
-
especially in the area of how fast updates to signatures are made.
Only if the sample is a legitamate contender for an update.
Most items or a least a gread deal of them aren't.
True. However, I do see often someone who is well versed in this stuff, tell one to submit the sample to Jotti.
I have seen several reports that noted when a new virus appeared, and how fast the various AVs added it to their signature bases, and it was detected. In all cases Avast was one of the slower AVs, and not by minutes but by days in some cases. I wish I could remember the sites, but I do not and, therefore, my statement is not good in a court of law.
What we are really discussing here is the speed with which Avast does include a signature in its data base. I have seen enough data to convince me that it is one of the slowest. That is not unimportant in selection of an AV.
All AVs are good enough until one gets infected.
Regards,
Jerry
-
What we are really discussing here is the speed with which Avast does include a signature in its data base. I have seen enough data to convince me that it is one of the slowest. That is not unimportant in selection of an AV.
Anyway, things seem to be better and becoming better.
All AVs are good enough until one gets infected.
Sure... when we get infected we forgot any other reasons that support the AV we were using :(
Other Vlk posts about AV comparisons:
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=4979.msg36041#msg36041
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=12175.msg102828#msg102828
Here how independent are some of these tests: http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=14071.0
-
:) Hi all :
Perhaps those that regularly recommend Jotti will cease
based on Vlk's Info on their use of Linux-based Versions ?
-
No doubt that most, I think, test orgs are not really independent. I do not trust magazines and such that test or have it done. I believe they are influenced by advertisers.
The only one that I place much stock in is AV Comparatives.
I also agree that detection rates are not the single criterion with which to make a selection. An AV that does not run well on your system is almost worthless. I could name one that is considered a top rung AV that has so many issues on some systems that it is useless. I personally experience that problem.
But the reason I have any security application is to provide protection from malware. Accordingly, if several AVs run well on my systems, and if money is not a problem then I select the one with the best detection rates. I will also say that support is an important consideration.
I do not have any special dedication to any software, and so if it does well for me, I keep it. If it does not suit my criteria, then I dump it.
As we have discussed before, layering is very important. I just re-installed Avast Home on my laptop. I do not use it on the internet much except when I travel in our RV and such.
While I would not trust Avast alone as much as a few other AVs, the amount of use it gets, and the other applications I use; Ewido plus, SuperAntiSpyware, Win Patrol Plus, Kerio 2.1.5, UnHackMe, and Snoopfree, give me the security I think I need.
While I would not want to trust any one AV alone, there are some better than others.
Best,
Jerry
-
:) Hi all :
Perhaps those that regularly recommend Jotti will cease
based on Vlk's Info on their use of Linux-based Versions ?
Well I normally also give virustotal and in most cases where we give the references to Jotti and VirusTotal it is more for confirmation of a false positive detection or otherwise. So if more AVs also record it as infected it is less likely to be a false positive.
So for this purpose (FP confirmation, etc) I don't see the Linux engine being a problem, that backed up by the windows engine of virustotal.
-
Had the insufficient protection of avast! I have installed the AntiVir (better in heuristic) and the Kaspersky online (better in on-demand). The evaluation made for the AV-Comparatives me does not seem true in relation on-demand
In all the tests that I made in the Virustotal the VPS had become available of the following way:
Kaspersky some hours
AVG of one the two days
AntiVir of two the three weeks
Avast never ... :'( Only now avast! it is reacting: one week
-
I asume you are no longer using avast ?
As both antivir and avast being resident scanners will clash with avast disabling elements to avoid conflict.
-
Yes, only one is active (avast! ) with the other ( AntiVir )I make scan.
Another thing, today (thursday) and tuesday avast! it did not have VPS. Yesterday (wednesday) the VPS was of only 9 KB. AntiVir and AVG (except saturday and sunday) have VPS every day. Tthis always occurs…
avast! it goes badly !!!!!!
-
Avast never ... Only now avast! it is reacting: one week
I must have been very lucky using such a terrible AV program for the past 3 years and still have a
clean uninfected system. ;D
-
I installed Avast Home on my laptop today, and I thought that it did update later in the day. It happens so fast that I am not sure what has happened. The updates seem small, and I suppose that is to prevent long download times on dial-up.
I'll have to be more diligent and see what the updates are, and how often.
I had F-Secure on the laptop, but I did not like the way it updated. KAV updates at startup, and as often as I schedule it. The updates are very fast also, as are the scans. However, F-Secure would indicate that it checked, but it might be an hour or so before the update really took place. It also does not update on weekends.
When I travel, and use the laptop I will be on dial-up, and I did not want to spend a lot of time updating. Accordingly I removed F-Secure.
I am not sure whether I will leave Avast Home on or go to KAV6 which I have on my PC. Newegg has KAV6 for $24.99. I might go that route, but I want to look at Avast some more. I have used it in the past, and it always ran well.
Regards,
Jerry
-
Avast never ... Only now avast! it is reacting: one week
I must have been very lucky using such a terrible AV program for the past 3 years and still have a
clean uninfected system. ;D
Me too. ;D
I must have been very lucky using such a terrible AV program like avast! that...
- lacks of heuristics
- not update daily
- not trying to detect everything
- not on #1 at AV-Comparatives.org
- not on #1 at Virus Bulletin Award
- no West Coast Labs certification
- not detect almost all virus samples/junk files at Jotti and VirusTotal online scanner
- it has ugly skins
- it takes almost 20+ MB of memory
....
I must be a very few people that very lucky for the past 2 years and still have a clean uninfected system with terrible AV program like avast!.
-
Avast never ... Only now avast! it is reacting: one week
I must have been very lucky using such a terrible AV program for the past 3 years and still have a
clean uninfected system. ;D
Me too. ;D
I must have been very lucky using such a terrible AV program like avast! that...
Very lucky? It is because they had not made downloads of risk sources…
And more! Kaspersky has two or three VPS daily (also weekend).
-
It is because they had not made downloads of risk sources…
I suppose you're watching everything we do and all the place we go on the net ???
-
And more! Kaspersky has two or three VPS daily (also weekend).
As far as I know, Kaspersky Labs (the maker of Kaspersky Anti-Virus) seems to release virus signatures every 1 - 3 hours a day.
-
It is because they had not made downloads of risk sources…
I suppose you're watching everything we do and all the place we go on the net ???
Not, I imagine… Because he is very easy to be contaminated.
-
I am persuaded that we tend to get sidetracked in such threads as this one.
The real question is, "Does Avast update regularly, and does it include latest malware in the updates on the first day or if not when?"
There seems to be a defensive attitude when one's AV is criticized. But the way to solve problems is to admit they exist and attempt to solve them or get those who can solve them to do so.
The fact that one has not been infected in years does not prove that they are not at increased risk due to slow updating, and lack of detection.
Sometimes the criticism is rather harsh, but if it is legitimate then take it for what it is.
If in fact Avast has not updated today or for several days, then that is putting users at increased risk. I do not want an AV that does not update every day, and that includes week-ends. F-Secure doesn't update on week-ends unless there is an outbreak. I do not expect to keep it, plus it scans much slower than KAV.
It is a fact that safe users do not get infected very much, and so that only proves that the AV is adequate for your use. That is what each of wants, but some are at higher risk, and need an Av with top detection rates, and frequent updates.
Most I know use AVG free, which has some of the lowest detection rates, but it evidently does a good job on email scanning, and I do not know of anyone who has gotten infected as long as they kept progams updated.
I am a very safe surfer, and never visit risky sites. However, as I have read and talked to some who have been seriously infected, I have concluded that the $25 - $50 bucks for a top AV is worth the money. Many will not agree, and that is OK.
If I am going to pay, then I want the best detection rates along with good support and smooth working on my systems.
I will probably settle for KAV on both computers, and will have confidence that I am as secure as I can be. For now, I do want to watch reports regarding Avast and a couple of others for the next few weeks or months.
Regards,
Jerry
-
@ JerryM,
You seem to answer your own question, why you don't pay for something you feel happy with it. :-*
-
@ JerryM,
You seem to answer your own question, why you don't pay for something you feel happy with it. :-*
I do, but I do like to play with such things also. For that reason I have used Avast some, but in the long haul I will probably buy KAV. If it does not run well, and I feel sure it will, I would go to NOD.
It is in the area of trojan detection that many AVs fall short, as evidenced by examining AV Comparatives on-demand tests. Take a look there and notice the relatively poor showing of some of them.
The addition of a good AT probably largely offsets that disadvantage. Layering makes most AVs very satisfactory for most users. In general, I would feel comfortable with Avast Home plus Ewido.
Avast is not a poor AV. But the question here is about updates. Does it update at least daily or not, and how long does it take to include malware signatures in its updates?
Best,
Jerry
-
Avast is not a poor AV. But the question here is about updates. Does it update at least daily or not, and how long does it take to include malware signatures in its updates?
Best,
Jerry
Such question has been asked and answered several times.
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=8739.msg71916#msg71916
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=6045.msg50305#msg50305
Hope this helps.
-
:) Hi Henrique - RJ :
If I were you, I would be more concerned with the no-
longer-to-be-updated-by-Microsoft Win ME OS !? The
longer you retain that OS, the more susceptible to
viruses, trojans, worms, keyloggers, etc you will become .
-
:) Hi Henrique - RJ :
If I were you, I would be more concerned with the no-
longer-to-be-updated-by-Microsoft Win ME OS !? The
longer you retain that OS, the more susceptible to
viruses, trojans, worms, keyloggers, etc you will become .
:) Hi Spiritsongs,
I dont believe...
Well, today (friday) I sent for virus@avast.com a false positive. I want to see in how much time I will have reply.
>>:_CHEST_ANALYZE_:<<
Virus name: VBS:Malware [Script]
Original file location: C:\WINDOWS\Desktop\thekeys[1].htm
Computer name: P7K7O7
Transfer time: 27.07.2006 23:40:19
Modification time: 27.07.2006 23:37:38
Total size: 11330
Comment:
File ID: 78
Category: 2
OS:
Microsoft Windows Me
thekeys[1].htm it's not infected by VBS:Malware [Script].
(http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/3018/imagemww3.jpg)
-
The last time I sent avast a false positive I got no reply ... what I did get was a VPS update in a few hours that fixed it. Enough for me. Good heavens! Surely we do not need to get stroked by avast to tell us we are good citizens!
In the end the vast majority of us will be satisfied not by updated signature files every 8 hours but by years on years of not being infected.
This is not being defensive of avast - it is the simple experience of a group of users experiencing no infection and getting it - gratefully - from avast without payment.
AVG may have given us the same experience - but for my users and their needs avast is a little simpler to use. Every user who has years of no infection will believe their antivirus is very good. Pay what you like if it makes you feel more secure - but in the end you cannot be more secure than no infection - argue as you will.
-
[Well, today (friday) I sent for virus@avast.com a false positive. I want to see in how much time I will have reply.
thekeys[1].htm it's not infected by VBS:Malware [Script].[/color][/b]
Why does YOUR avast does not detect it and VirusTotal did?
-
Yes, only one is active (avast! ) with the other ( AntiVir )I make scan.
Another thing, today (thursday) and tuesday avast! it did not have VPS. Yesterday (wednesday) the VPS was of only 9 KB. AntiVir and AVG (except saturday and sunday) have VPS every day. Tthis always occurs…
avast! it goes badly !!!!!!
Having two resident scanners on your system, without much tweaking doesn't work. It has been noted many times in these forums that avast and antivir don't work well together, even if one is disabled. They both try to enable drivers and may have conflicting registry legacy keys. avast when it finds other resident AVs will disable elements to avoid conflict, so you might well be making yourself more vulnerable.
avast doesn't have a schedule of VPS updates, they are issued when there are any available, there have been times when I have had 4 updates in a day, rather than an average of 3-4 per week. I have been using avast for over two years without problem.
If you are so disappointed with avast, no one is stopping you from seeking pastures new.
It seems like your only contribution to these forums is this Topic you started, somewhat different from this one - Congratulations to frequent VPS updates of Avast - http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=21862.msg182077#msg182077 Strange that the two Topics that you created could be so opposed ::)
-
i would like to point out one important thing
Jotti uses linux versions and VirusTotal uses Windows versions of AV/AT/AS software ...
i noticed very often that some Jotti AV fails on marking multiple packers and archives while VirusTotal version of same get it ...
then i noticed same vice versa with some linux based malware ...
so IF you going to compare Avast effectivity for Windows i suggest You use VirusTotal first ... then recheck with Jotti
-
i would like to point out one important thing
Jotti uses linux versions and VirusTotal uses Windows versions of AV/AT/AS software ...
Yes I believe Vlk mentioned this in the thread, reply #34.
-
[Well, today (friday) I sent for virus@avast.com a false positive. I want to see in how much time I will have reply.
thekeys[1].htm it's not infected by VBS:Malware [Script].[/color][/b]
Why does YOUR avast does not detect it and VirusTotal did?
:) Hi Tech
Flamengo 1 X Vasco 0
O Fla é bicampeão parabéns... aaeeee... eim...
" thekeys[1].htm it's not infected by VBS:Malware [Script] " I wrote in the email for the Alwil ( my avast! it also detects it ).
Hey DavidR
Having two resident scanners on your system, without much tweaking doesn't work. It has been noted many times in these forums that avast and antivir don't work well together, even if one is disabled. They both try to enable drivers and may have conflicting registry legacy keys. avast when it finds other resident AVs will disable elements to avoid conflict, so you might well be making yourself more vulnerable.
I do not believe. Not yet I observed conflicts between the two.
avast doesn't have a schedule of VPS updates, they are issued when there are any available, there have been times when I have had 4 updates in a day, rather than an average of 3-4 per week. I have been using avast for over two years without problem.
You are satisfied with the current situation of avast ????
It sees, today ( friday ) AntiVir had of VPS 200 KB and avast! only 8 KB... :'( :'( :'(
If you are satisfied then not necessary to improve and you will continue with one antivirus weak in detection !!!
If you are so disappointed with avast, no one is stopping you from seeking pastures new.
For this reason I have installed AntiVir and Kaspersky online.
It seems like your only contribution to these forums is this Topic you started, somewhat different from this one - Congratulations to frequent VPS updates of Avast - http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=21862.msg182077#msg182077 Strange that the two Topics that you created could be so opposed.
I do not see as the topical opposites also I alerted on the lack of examination for the Alwil of files distributed by the VirusTotal. I could not disagree with the initiated topic therefore I had been one week atypical ( he would have that to wait to see if updates would continue being daily in the following weeks ).
My only objective when initiating this post was to display the situation for Alwil so that it comes to improve avast! Contrary case would go everything to continue in the way that is.
I would not have as much work if avast did not like it! I guarantee to it.
And to change this situation with our union we will go to obtain success.
-
I think that you have to give credit where credit is due. I think avast is doing much better with their updates. just look at the size of todays update.
http://www.avast.com/eng/vps_history.html
-
I think that you have to give credit where credit is due. I think avast is doing much better with their updates. just look at the size of todays update.
http://www.avast.com/eng/vps_history.html
Hi marc57
Still it is early for compliments…
Alwil continues not examining what it is distributed by the VirusTotal and its VPS are not daily (3 or 4 per week only) and with few KB each generally. Others antivirus are better.
I have sent files malicious for VirusTotal and these are not being examined. And many are files malicious that they are sent every day for the VirusTotal.
The detection pro-activates (heuristic) also needs to be improved (AV-Comparatives).
-
Oh dear ... is this just coming down to a "my VPS is bigger than yours" contest?
How are you measuring the value of VPS updates ... by frequency and size?
We can soon descend into unnecessary analogies I know ... but seriously ...
If we follow your logic then the "other" product (whatever it is) that you are comparing with avast must very soon with its frequency and size of updates have literally millions more signatures than avast and must be the best antivirus in the world by any measurement.
Why do we not all flock to it in droves and pay whatever money it asks for such frequent and huge updates?
Why ... perhaps because the basis of your faith is flawed?
Sorry for the old analogy ... quality versus quantity. I really do want you to keep avast on its toes and looking over its shoulder at the competition ... but you are straining my logic.
The real and only useful test for any antivirus ... if only we could have it ... is how many of its users got infected today?
For those of us that did not ... avast stays as our product of choice for another day.
-
You are satisfied with the current situation of avast ????
It sees, today ( friday ) AntiVir had of VPS 200 KB and avast! only 8 KB... :'( :'( :'(
Try to read these comments...
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=20767.msg173909#msg173909
-
It has idea of as they are the updates of others antivirus?
I know the AVG, the AntiVir and the Kaspersky.
All the day has VPS and with many KB… They knew?
What I want to say is that this type of comparison is only one parameter for evaluation ( superficial evaluation ).
In this Saturday for example we had 20 KB of VPS. I consider a good update in comparison with others antivirus.
My objective to post in fórum is to show the Alwil that the users of avast! they are intent the quality. It is to wait that the Alwil improves avast!
-
i would like to point out one important thing
Jotti uses linux versions and VirusTotal uses Windows versions of AV/AT/AS software ...
Yes I believe Vlk mentioned this in the thread, reply #34.
oi me blindly blind ... argh ... :o ;D
-
It has idea of as they are the updates of others antivirus?
I know the AVG, the AntiVir and the Kaspersky.
All the day has VPS and with many KB… They knew?
What I want to say is that this type of comparison is only one parameter for evaluation ( superficial evaluation ).
In this Saturday for example we had 20 KB of VPS. I consider a good update in comparison with others antivirus.
My objective to post in fórum is to show the Alwil that the users of avast! they are intent the quality. It is to wait that the Alwil improves avast!
The deal is incremental updates, in doing so avast is able to keep the update VPS size small. We don't know how/what others do so we can't compare directly, so unless you compare like with like the exercise is pointless. I do know that that some don't use incremental updates at all and you are forced to download megabytes rather than kilobytes, so based on your logic the larger the better, I think not.
I'm glad that we now know your objective " to show the Alwil that the users of avast! they are intent the quality." Strange since you are no longer an avast user. I also believe they have heard this from a number of sources in the past and are striving to achieve this and also introduce other improvements to avast, not to do so would not make commercial sense.
So to continue banging on about the same thing in this way won't achieve anything other than for this topic to go to the dogs as I believe it is beginning to and it will lose the original purpose and your objective.
If you are so disappointed with avast, no one is stopping you from seeking pastures new.
For this reason I have installed AntiVir and Kaspersky online.
I'm sure they will welcome your feed back on 'their' forums.
-
Hello. I use FireFox Browser with Site Advisor, Kerio 4.2.2 Firewall, practice safe surfing, and of course use Avast as my Antivirus. Why Avast? Because even though I use what is considered a safe browser, a decent Firewall, plus watch what sites I go on. Avast simply gives me an added confindence that I'm well protected. But wait that's not all! There's more! LOLOL This confidence is more than I felt using AVG Free for protection, and although I have tried Antivir with it's better detection rate and Nag Screen, I still have more confidence in using Avast because of it's updater compared to Antivir's. Add in the very helpful Forum here, that in my opinion surpasses both of these Antiviruses Forums, (And others) and it just gives me one more reason to have confidence in using Avast.
-
I come back to repeat…
What I wait is that the analysts of avast! they examine everything regularly what it is distributed by the VirusTotal and also everything what it is sent for virus@avast.com
I have 13 malicious files (image below) that they had been sent for VirusTotal and avast! until today he does not detect them. AntiVir, AVG and Kaspersky detect all.
(http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/6759/imagemdo0.jpg)
-
What I'd like to know is where you're getting these from so I can relate
as to whether or not they are something dangerous for us or just files
that we never have to worry about in the first place.
-
What I'd like to know is where you're getting these from so I can relate
as to whether or not they are something dangerous for us or just files
that we never have to worry about in the first place.
Me Too.
I often wonder, when someone is complaining at all the virus type malware on their systems just where have they been to get such infections. If certain sites are bad, then I intend to stay away from them, and not depend upon my security apps to protect me.
Best,
Jerry
-
Hello !
I am returning...
I come here to communicate that finally the analysts of avast! they are examining the distribution of the VirusTotal (even so they have to improve).
Sunday, 24 of September, I tested file “virtualcard.exe” (Trojan) in the VirusTotal and today, 10 of October (15 days after), avast! now it detects it.
(http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/1599/virtualcardpn1.jpg)
Now only I have to complain of the examination that is not being made of files that they are sent for virus@avast.com (from the chest).
ANALYSTS OF THE AVAST! PLEASE, EXAMINE THE FILES THAT ARE SENDING FOR THE E-MAIL virus@avast.com !!! THIS WAS ABANDONED !!!
Initiate the topic “avast! it goes badly” was important…
-
I wish Alwil team take in a very special account the files send to analysis by known contributors and forum members ::)
Anyway, seems that you've added the file to Chest on September 24th... look at the Chest picture...
Are you sure that avast only detected it today? ??? ::)
-
Hi Tech :D
Yes, it was only detected in day 10 of October.
It sees in the image below the name of the Trojan in the VPS of day 10 of October.
(http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/7487/imagemmu6.jpg)
-
Yes, it was only detected in day 10 of October.
:'( :'(
-
Well the samples that Henrique - RJ send were added to the VPS after 15 days.
I send samples to Alwil on 18.08.2006 and even got reply: "Samples from your emails (17.8,
18.8 ) will be added in some of next VPS updates.", but now we are 11.10.2006 and still nothing - with exception of 4 samples which were added not long ago (I send them about 10 new samples) :P
And that was the time when I recieved a respond. I don't want to mention the times when I did not recieved and respond - and the samples I send were not added.
Or when they add detection and after few weeks they remove the detection (few times). What's the sense in that :P
I wonder when the new submition system will be out? ::)
-
I wonder when the new submition system will be out? ::)
Why coudn't Alwil manage this yet? It's a pity that the submition and update process weren't much better after some new people were working there on Alwil lab...
Why? ??? ::)
-
Well, poor Henrique! :o
I understand you want to help to improve Avast and this is a noble and chastisingly painful experience and cause, but there is only so much you can do. I suggest learning how to code C and VB, then you can help improving the engines and updating detection routines and signatures, a perfect job for a junior programmer, and under my wing you would become a code mage but this is beyond the point.
I like Avast to be honest. The modular engines etc. But it's not about techs whining or people complaining, it's about common sense. I mean as a simple user after waiting months?? for signatures to be included, I would choose another AV. I've had some false positive I wanted to be included in VPS and it took a little time and was done and my contribution was for ever lasting. It wasn't as painful or long as it is for you.
May compassion help,
I commend you and wish you luck in your grand endeavor,
Trial_User_Re(Un)Installing.
-
Hello, I'm coming back !
I have avast Home Edition 4,7 installed in my computer and what much dislikes me it is the delay in the inclusion of the new detention of malwares.
It has weeks that I sent for virus@avast.com, ftp://ftp.avast.com/incoming and for the VirusTotal (http://www.virustotal.com/flash/index_en.html) some types of malwares and until today none of them it is detected by avast.
Many computers for the world that trust the security in avast must be being contaminated for these malwares that I sent. It seems that they are not priority for the analysts of avast malwares coming from these sources.
avast! it goes badly !
-
However, I look at the price point and I look at on the ground experience. The price point of the home version cannot be beaten. For the two years that I and those I support have been using avast there has been no instance of infection not found by avast that have infected our systems or been detected by the other layered scans that we use - but avast is and has been the resident antivirus.
You and those you support use avast! Home? Surely you do not provide support for free, right? Because if you use your computer for work, you do not qualify for the avast! Home license...
-
Surely you do not provide support for free, right?
Wrong. Can't you believe that there are people that share the experience of avast for free?
Would you think that they will 'pay' all of us? Our time?
Forget it... something different than money move us 8)
Because if you use your computer for work, you do not qualify for the avast! Home license...
In my work computer I use avast Professional version. In two home computers, the home version.
-
snarky
yes, to those I support my services are entirely free.
-
Dear Henrique,
I like you have submitted virus in the past and know that it is very fustrating to wait for the detection which can sometimes be very long, however please understand that virus (@) avast (.) net gets a minimum of 3000 emails per day and so its very hard for them to read all the emails in time.
I also agree that Alwil should work on the problem because as Avast gets more popular it is likely that avast will get more emails submitting files and so Avast should ajust now.
Al968
-
Dear Henrique,
I like you have submitted virus in the past and know that it is very fustrating to wait for the detection which can sometimes be very long, however please understand that virus (@) avast (.) net gets a minimum of 3000 emails per day and so its very hard for them to read all the emails in time.
I also agree that Alwil should work on the problem because as Avast gets more popular it is likely that avast will get more emails submitting files and so Avast should ajust now.
Al968
But this doesn't happen with the Kaspersky that also receives thousand from samples every day and it processes them in 24 hours.
-
But this doesn't happen with the Kaspersky that also receives thousand from samples every day and it processes them in 24 hours.
The more we try to explain the worse becomes the situation.
It's urgent that Alwil improve detection & submition of viruses.
Can the users be happy with less than this?