RunScanner 1.0 released! (out of beta)

[Lusher]

still probably a false postive...knowing avg-why are you using avg in the first place
try this- http://www.kaspersky.com/kos/english/kavwebscan.html & http://www.bitdefender.com/ click on scan now- both online not resident
and see if they detect anything
what is the name of the trojan

Trojan  horse SHeur.GYL.

I scan with 30 different antivirus/antispyware (including KAV and bitdefender) using multiple engine scan, much easier than using the two you mention.

And no I don't use AVG (not mainly), I'm just reporting what i found.

But I'm not a dr like you, so I bow to your superior expertise with antiviruses.

[Lisandro]

ran avast!-bitdefender online scan-kaspersky online scan
ad-aware 2007-superasntispyware-spyware doctor full version & ewido online scanner

Also
a-squared: clean
SpywareTerminator: clean
AVGas: clean

Strange that the 'good' guys does not detect the suspicious 'bad' guy... uh?

[Lisandro]

The antivirus.

The well known false positives of Grisoft...

[Lusher]

ran avast!-bitdefender online scan-kaspersky online scan
ad-aware 2007-superasntispyware-spyware doctor full version & ewido online scanner

Also
a-squared: clean
SpywareTerminator: clean
AVGas: clean

Strange that the 'good' guys does not detect the suspicious 'bad' guy... uh?

Not so strange, I have found any number of 'bad guys' that initally only 1 or 2 scanners out of 30+ at virustotal find something fishy (via heuristics) so it is not so unthinkable that RS might be malware and only AVG and counterspy are seeing something possibly malicious via heuristics.

Not saying it is, mind you, just saying it is not impossible.

[Lusher]

The antivirus.

The well known false positives of Grisoft...

Is counterspy known to have high FP rates too?

[Lusher]

Changelog 1.0.2
Fixed bug with "problem with shortcut , searching for file gui"
Fixed false positive warning with AVG antivirus
(Thanks to Lusher for reporting the bug)

Changelog 1.0.1 (Bugfix)
Fixed bug with AppInit_DLLs (Thanks to Lusher for reporting the bug)

[Lisandro]

Is counterspy known to have high FP rates too?

As far I know, yes.

Not so strange, I have found any number of 'bad guys' that initally only 1 or 2 scanners out of 30+ at virustotal find something fishy (via heuristics) so it is not so unthinkable that RS might be malware and only AVG and counterspy are seeing something possibly malicious via heuristics. Not saying it is, mind you, just saying it is not impossible.

Isn't this just FUD?

[drhayden1]

at least it wasn't found on my two computers and i have had bad experiences with false positives as tech and many others on this forum know
and that trojan you posted was misspelled-could find in couple of databases
 
 

[Lusher]

Is counterspy known to have high FP rates too?

As far I know, yes.

Not so strange, I have found any number of 'bad guys' that initally only 1 or 2 scanners out of 30+ at virustotal find something fishy (via heuristics) so it is not so unthinkable that RS might be malware and only AVG and counterspy are seeing something possibly malicious via heuristics. Not saying it is, mind you, just saying it is not impossible.

Isn't this just FUD?

No it isn't. Unless you think that there is no malware that isn't detected by majority (or even all) of the scanners, but I know a person of your experience definitely isn't so ignorant. Many (most?) new malware start out undetected by all the scanners (some might guess using heuristics), I reported 3 such samples in the last month and I wasn't even hunting for them on purpose.

Besides a little bit of caution is hardly FUD, and I'm insulted you would accuse me of that!

[Lusher]

at least it wasn't found on my two computers and i have had bad experiences with false positives as tech and many others on this forum know
and that trojan you posted was misspelled-could find in couple of databases
 
 

Nah, it's correctly spelled. It is clearly a heuristic (maybe generic?) type detection , you will never find information about it.

[Lisandro]

Besides a little bit of caution is hardly FUD, and I'm insulted you would accuse me of that!

I'm not accusing anybody of nothing... just my personal impression and my experience with RunScanner.

[drhayden1]

you will never find information about it

so what's the point then looking for something that doesn't EXIST

[Lusher]

you will never find information about it

so what's the point then looking for something that doesn't EXIST

Hmm maybe you don't know that much about antiviruses.

Some antivirus have a generic name given for malware that is detected by heuristics. It's a placeholder name.

Normally an antivirus has a specific signature for a certain malware, so it can give it a proper name.

But heuristics are just a "guess", so they don't have actual names for it, just placeholder generic names. Until it is properly analysed , then a specific signature will be created for it, and a specific name.

[drhayden1]

Hmm maybe you don't know that much about antiviruses.

i was just making a general comment and not to get in a who knows what and who doesn't
better things to do with my time that worry about a little computer bug-when i have some real ones in real life to worry about and for knowing about anti-viruses and viruses-more that you will ever know

[Lusher]

and for knowing about anti-viruses and viruses-more that you will ever know

I have no doubt about that. Everyone of you AVAST! evangelist has forgotten more stuff about antiviruses than I will ever know.