Free Avast -- Phoning Home -- while update settings are set to manual.

[Dch48]

Simply put, any antivirus product should be allowed to automatically receive definition updates as soon as they become available. Otherwise, it's being crippled in it's effectiveness.

[avast@@dvantage77.com]

"I have my updates set to happen every 16440 minutes because I know what I'm doing when browsing the internet."

WOW!  Approximately 23,500 infected webpages are discovered every day! Every 3.6 seconds another website is infected!

http://www.scmagazine.com/every-36-seconds-a-website-is-infected/article/140414/

[FerisH]

I am honestly enraptured with crossing this topic here, as "Non consenting Home Phoning ", for whatever "reason" it might be, is an eternal Internet annoyance. I am delighted that my "Brothers in Arms" - End_User and colwarg, perfectly pointed on Avast excessive activity, certain "misbehavior", one of common policies within software programming hidden world.

"Free" users actually have no right to reprimand Avast, in spite of its arbitrary, somehow invasive home-chatting behavior. I do like abundance of customizable functions, where the best one is handy and quick shields control. The worst one, nonexistent function is that you can't make it quiet. Here I miss old good practice, when pack of AV definitions we used to download manually, without "nasty punks" calling home, who knows why and for what exactly.

Good security can be maintained, as in a WWII Atlantic theater, with total radio silence. I wish my Windows PC would be silent to "Internet Ocean" as a submarine in a war zone. AV software should work more like sonar, which only announces potential threat to me and all decisions are left to captain - me again.

A rule of thumb for any good software is that it should offer full customization for advanced users, with no auto-deviations from "orders". For that I would be willing to pay in gold. Whether AV Companies like it or not, your/their software is secondary defense line. Primary defense are strict NTFS security settings with recommended work in Limited User Windows environment, supported by extra configured Firefox add-ons NoScript and AdBlock+, running in sandbox eventually. For email client use Thunderbird and that's it.

In the world and Internet particularly, where no one can trust anyone, including own governments, persistent AV software dubious umbilical and hidden traffic with home servers are suitable tools for all kind of "extra activities".

[bob3160]

@FerisH
The best thing you can do is go back to using an old fashioned typewriter and adding machine.
Internet access and connecting you to it to keep you fully updated as to the latest threats is imperative
for all security programs.
If you're looking for anonymity, then the internet is the wrong place. There is no privacy in this modern world.

[FerisH]

@bob3160
It seems as you can't or don't want to understand what me and other two guys are talking about. If Avast, aside of other excellent customizable settings, offers manual update, I do expect this literally, no arbitrary auto connections at all, total "radio silence".   

Let me emphasize again what is here irritating in general, not about Avast only - it is programmer's intentional malignant unwillingness, to let off hidden umbilical with their software, once it settles on other people machines.

And no, I am not looking for anonymity; I despise stalking like tracking of any kind. Programmers are addicted as kind of junkies to these extremely aggravating policies, simply because they can.  Microsoft is one of world leaders and not even the worst. 

[Dch48]

Let me emphasize again what is here irritating in general, not about Avast only - it is programmer's intentional malignant unwillingness, to let off hidden umbilical with their software, once it settles on other people machines. 

First off, there is nothing "malignant " in a security application receiving automatic updates. In fact is is very much to be desired.  Only having manual updating of an anti-malware application is , to put it plainly, foolish.

[FerisH]

@RE to Dch48
It is interesting how undoubtedly intelligent people do not understand certain concept. Nowhere I mentioned or marked automatic updates malignant. Once again Avast has excellent UI with lot of custom options, where shields control is superb. Subject is on manual update control, which is not exactly as declared and expected.

When my (custom configured) Windows XP load completely, there is no single ping or any other outgoing traffic to Internet and such silence remains until I start with certain activity. With Avast, even set to manual, there is constant outgoing traffic. I was experimenting with IP blocking, when blocked on one IP it switches to another one and this "game" goes on. Let me emphasize, this is not updating traffic, which is set to 1440.

Arbitrary hidden outgoing auto-traffic, benign or malignant, is what annoys me. Avast is not the only one, nowadays every piece of newer software is "noisier" from previous version. And this has nothing with eventual desire for anonymity as respectable @bob3160 commented.

To summarize, unwanted and excessive outgoing auto-traffic, whatever reason it might have, is unacceptable and understood as malignant "Unconsenting Home Phoning"   

[Dch48]

I can only explain the extra traffic as Avast checking the cloud services for possible new detection signatures or file reputation. MSE has done the same things since it's inception.

[tacoma43]

@End_User

If you haven't found a satisfactory solution to your problem, you might inspect your Scheduled Tasks folder for EmUpdate additions.  After a fresh install of v7.0.1466.549, I was surprised — and disappointed — to find that Avast! had added several new entries.

HTH you regain control of your computer.

[avast@@dvantage77.com]

Dch48 is correct.  For avast! to continiue to be one of the best products, it has to use cloud services for it to work properly, streaming updates, file rep, whitelist / blacklist, autosanbox, etc. all need to communicate with avast!

[polonus]

Hi FerisH,

But what is always upsetting to me is the double standards that are used here. When commercial tracking of all sorts goes on behind our backs unnoticed often and unseen, look here for instance to this example : http://www.cookiechecker.nl/check-cookies.php?url=http://blogher.org/&cache=false Ispecially pay attention to third party requests given there WOT score very bad for some) or more stealth ways like very heavily obfuscated scripts to hide tracking behind or the use of pixel by pixel web beacons that I can only spot to check using an add-on like web bug detector. looking up the web beacon links.
Well , when all this is going along all of the time under the hood of a normal webbrowser, no one pays any attention nor protests. On the other hand when an av-solution does some web traffic to perform essential network services for the better protection of all users, all cry wolf here.

You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

quote from Matthew 7:5

polonus

[bob3160]

On the other hand when an av-solution does some web traffic to perform essential network services for the better protection of all users, all cry wolf here.

Primarily one person is crying wolf. The rest of us know better.

[avast@@dvantage77.com]

Here is an email I send to clients to try to enlighten them as to what is going on in the background!  This is one reason we are always normally rated #1 or #2

"avast! AutoSandbox 7.3 is the most impressive advancement in antivirus in years.  The addition of the cloud services module adds a highly mature white listing / black listing database that now includes tens of millions of files. AutoSandbox learns from every user, everyday!  With 180 million users, this database is the most extensive of its type in the world. After white listing, unknown code is analyzed for other variables, including file reputation, file origin, URL source, file signature, and code analysis.  If at any stage the file is deemed safe, it is automatically executed.  Polymorphic code is many times impossible to detect in these first stages. The file packer is embedded at the end of the code. So the initial scan has nothing to go on until this point.  If the packer is known, then the Sandbox will now decrypt the file using the appropriate decompression algorithm. If the file is still not judged safe, or it uses an unknown packer (many virus writers will author their own packers) then the file is executed in the sandbox. As this code executes, it is halted at multiple intervals for structural checks, undergoing analysis for viral characteristics and behavior, i.e. "start”, “run" or writing to the registry.  At any time if the code is confirmed as malicious, it is moved directly to the virus chest.  Under full analysis, the user will see "This code is being analyzed" for a maximum of 15 seconds.  If at any time the code is deemed safe, it is allowed to fully execute.  This type of code analysis will change antivirus software as we know it!"