As I explained in his other topic, avast and other AVs would scan files that are at risk of infection (e.g. targeted) and present an immediate risk if run/opened and that is where the jpg exploit comes in.
But that same .jpg exploit can be used as a .wmv exploit or a .txt exploit, right? Or even a .whatever exploit. It seems to me that if you want to protect against virus on reads, you should be looking at all reads. But if you only want to protect against virus on writes, then you shouldn't be looking at reads for anything, much less .jpg.
This "special status" of .jpg and .jpeg files seems a little strange and not what I've experienced in other virus programs I've used, that's all.
files that are at risk of infection (e.g. targeted) and present an immediate risk if executed/run/opened, executables most commonly, .exe, .com, .dll, etc. etc.
But for .exe, .com, and .dll, aren't those handled by the execute options? I like that avast appears to have segregated things by read, write, and execute, but then behind the scenes they appear to be breaking the rules for certain file types.
Oh well, I've got a work around for it. I'll continue to evaluate the program. It looks like avast does some other things based solely on file extension. I'm not sure if I like that, but I'll tweak with it and see how it goes.
Thanks again for the help!
-Dave
