many posts about it here..... for those who bother to use forum search.
The OP's question was in regard to the startup entry and the particular file first placed in the emergency updater folder I believe on 21/11/2013 .
There have indeed been a lot of posts about both the placement of the registry entry, and the file itself, however aside from a short comment by Vlc that it was a genuine avast file, there has been no official statements to my knowledge as to:
(a) Whether the registry entry should have been in the RUN area.
(b) Whether it should have been automatically removed after it had run the file, or was intended to run for ever more every time the computer was rebooted
(c) Why that particular registry entry was needed when the emergency update is normally actioned by Task Scheduler entries each log on, and at a specific time each day, and repeated every 12 hours thereafter for that day.
(d) Any idea of what running the file actually did. Avast have indicated that they may also use the emergency update now for some program patches. Was this a patch, if so has the patch been incorporated in the installation file one downloads from Avast.
For example, the RUN entry did appear in my registry, from memory on the 21st Nov, and also the file in the emupdate folder, and they both remained there. I assume the file was being run each time I logged on. Last weekend however, at the request of Avast Support (on another issue), I uninstalled Avast 2014 using AvastClear.exe, then reinstalled from a newly downloaded installation file.
Several days and sundry reboots later, I don't have the RUN registry entry, and I don't have an emupdate folder, much less the "random character" file that was in it prior to the re-install. If my original 2014.9.0.2008 was patched, then is my reinstalled 2014.9.0.2008 installation now unpatched. It still has exactly the same version number.
If the patch/emergency update was so necessary back around 21/11/2013, then why isn't it now?.
Avast could have easily and simply answered these queries and put everyone's mind at rest. To my knowledge they have chosen to not issue any official statement aside from the one mentioned above by Vlc, and the lack of an official answer has in itself caused a loss of confidence.
It is of little use suggesting people should use the search function in regards to this particular issue. There is much conjecture and little fact. When and IF Avast decide to shed some light on this matter and offer a decent explanation, it should be made a sticky.
