Avast WEBforum
Consumer Products => Avast Free Antivirus / Premium Security (legacy Pro Antivirus, Internet Security, Premier) => Topic started by: George Yves on May 22, 2011, 12:49:36 PM
-
User mmore1990 from Russian subforum states (http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=78207.0) that remote computer control software Radmin (http://www.radmin.com/index.php?lang_ui=en) makes SafeZone completely unsafe. He and his friend installed Radmin on their computers and when mmore1990 started SafeZone on his computer, his friend entered his computer through Internet using Radmin and could see all the operations in SafeZone.
-
This Is Not Really To Do With SafeZone.
It's Actually A Virus Using The Network. You Are Unable To Do Safe Banking Probably Due To This.
If You Know What The Virus's Area Is Open Your Virus Chest, Right Click It And Press Add. Now Put In The File. Now Right Click On This File And Click Submit To Virus Lab.
Hopefully This Will Help And Good Luck.
-
- Just To Add -
If You're Using Avast Internet Security Check Out Your Firewall And You Might Find The Program. If You Do Shutdown The Connections IP.
-
This Is Not Really To Do With SafeZone.
Oh, really? How do you know this?
It's Actually A Virus Using The Network. You Are Unable To Do Safe Banking Probably Due To This.
Could you be more specific? What virus could allow a third-party program to penetrate SafeZone? If it is a virus, it is the most dangerous one I ever heard: a virus that can look into SafeZone breaks all your security.
-
If You're Using Avast Internet Security Check Out Your Firewall And You Might Find The Program. If You Do Shutdown The Connections IP.
Please, re-read my first post here: Radmin is installed on both computers. And it certainly means that Radmin is allowed through the firewall.
BTW, why are you typing all the words with capitalized first letters?
-
Actually this is interesting. I'd have to test it with LogMeIn as well. The thing is, these programs install a second display adapter which is basically a virtual one. Have never really tested if that can bypass SafeZone.
-
User mmore1990 adds one more program that can penetrate SafeZone. It's another remote computer control software Remote Manipulator System (http://rmansys.ru/). The site of the program is in Russian because it's made in Russia but if you click the link in the top right corner you'll be redirected to the English version of the site (http://www.remoteutilities.com/). There the program has another name (Remote Utilities) but the description shows that it is the same program.
-
But wouldn't this require some complicity on the part of the user, a) installing a remote connection software and b) agreeing to the other remote connection request (or sending the information {IP address} for the remote connection to be established ?
-
But wouldn't this require some complicity on the part of the user, a) installing a remote connection software and b) agreeing to the other remote connection request (or sending the information {IP address} for the remote connection to be established ?
User mmore1990 says that some methods of social engineering were used. They "persuaded" the victim to run a file on his computer. During the installation there was nothing seen on the screen and only the firewall informed that a program wants to establish an Internet connection. User mmore1990 says that not all users are very attentive and they can allow this program in their firewalls.
-
Yes, so a healthy degree of common sense and absolute requirement in todays Internet is essential. But the download and install of the remote software must require some time and the end user has to realise something isn't right.
Unfortunately, we see plenty of headless chicks that succumb to social engineering and it never ceases to amaze me how they fall for some of this cr*p.
But essentially the topic topic title is FUD. As it isn't an issue with the safe zone but one with the user.
-
But essentially the topic topic title is FUD. As it isn't an issue with the safe zone but one with the user.
I can't agree with you. The title isn't FUD and SafeZone must have protection from remote control software in spite of the way it was installed.
-
It should have, it is between the computer and the chair.
The SafeZone isn't 'completely unsafe' I don't know what part of that isn't FUD.
-
The SafeZone isn't 'completely unsafe' I don't know what part of that isn't FUD.
User mmore1990 says that all operations in SafeZone can be seen and screenshots can be taken. And you say that SafeZone is safe?
-
So what, the wording 'completely unsafe' it completely incorrect, no matter if it can be viewed or not.
Without complicity or stupidity on the part of the user then the safezone is perfectly fine. Not to mention this can't be a targeted attack, random IP address or visiting a hacked/malicious site (not so likely when using the safezone, web shield and network shield), so pot luck on what AV is installed and if avast, does/is the user have Pro/AIS and happens to be running the safezone at that time.
Too many coincidences required here for it to be that the safezone is 'completely unsafe,' the topic title being a play on words safezone being completely unsafe and an over dramatisation (FUD)
The same statement could be made of avast (and other AVs) if you apply the same logic, the users inadvertently gives permission for software (malicious) to be installed and run on their system. Typically fake AV, that generally requires the same degree of complicity on the part of the end user.
For those users very little will protect them when they act like this.
-
the topic title being a play on words safezone being completely unsafe and an over dramatisation
I can agree that it is an over-dramatization but I wouldn't say the title is FUD. This abbreviation sounds like a direct accusation of lies and slander.
-
the topic title being a play on words safezone being completely unsafe and an over dramatisation
I can agree that it is an over-dramatization but I wouldn't say the title is FUD. This abbreviation sounds like a direct accusation of lies and slander.
No it is an indication of a misrepresentation of the facts; as in that can't simply make this statement based only on limited facts. It causes Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, nothing more and nothing less.
-
So, let's stop discussing the title. I am an interpreter here, not the author.
User mmore1990 is sure that he said enough to grant high priority to the issue. He would like to know what the developers think about it.
-
I am an interpreter here, not the author.
You can't even interprete correctly, then.
Vulnerable does NOT mean "completely unsafe".
-
You can't even interprete correctly, then.
Vulnerable does NOT mean "completely unsafe".
Well, I've just corrected the title.
-
User mmore1990 is sure that he said enough to grant high priority to the issue. He would like to know what the developers think about it.
Tell him to post his issue here: http://www.avast.com/ru-ru/contact-form.php?loadStyles
-
Tell him to post his issue here: http://www.avast.com/ru-ru/contact-form.php?loadStyles
Sure, I'll tell him about that possibility. But it would be better if anybody from Avast team leave a message in this topic that they are aware of the problem.
-
But it would be better if anybody from Avast team leave a message in this topic that they are aware of the problem.
Contact Petr: http://forum.avast.com/index.php?action=profile;u=231715