TC 9 beta 2 - Avast Antivirus removes TC exe file
Moderators: Hacker, petermad, Stefan2, white
TC 9 beta 2 - Avast Antivirus removes TC exe file
Avast free antivirus removed TC exe file in version 9 beta 2. Also made impossible to install it again so I had to stop antivirus first.
- ghisler(Author)
- Site Admin
- Posts: 50909
- Joined: 2003-02-04, 09:46 UTC
- Location: Switzerland
- Contact:
I guess that this is the same bullsh*t detector as in Norton/Symantec Antivirus: If very few people use a program, the scanner automatically classifies it as an unknown virus (so called "reputation"). Maybe you can try to submit it to them from the quarantine, or send them the URL...
Author of Total Commander
https://www.ghisler.com
https://www.ghisler.com
- ghisler(Author)
- Site Admin
- Posts: 50909
- Joined: 2003-02-04, 09:46 UTC
- Location: Switzerland
- Contact:
So it was just the installer they disliked, maybe because it contained other programs inside...
Author of Total Commander
https://www.ghisler.com
https://www.ghisler.com
Hello all, as I have been personally testing the long awaited TC9 betas, thank you ghisler(Author), I of course do my usual very cautious analysis of any downloads before I allow them to install, regardless of current or previous reputation.
This is why I am posting because I believe I have the correct specific fundamental cause(s) to answer this topic precisely. I will present the facts and let everyone make their own decisions or opinions to hopefully correct and learn from them.
TC9 beta2 distribution files:
tc900x32_64_b2.exe
tc900x32_b2.exe
Sorry but the author has forgotten to add a valid digital signature to the two 32-bit TOTALCMD.EXE files, both the 64-bit TOTALCMD64.EXE files have valid digital signatures.
All TC9 beta3 distribution files have valid digital signatures for all TOTALCMD.EXE and TOTALCMD64.EXE files.
So I guess Avast (more on this later) is complaining about and deleting the embedded UNSIGNED 32-bit beta2 TOTALCMD.EXE files.
IMHO and from personal experience, I have tested a few releases of Avast and it has FAILED me on at least TWO occasions, so it belongs in the GARBAGE to me.
The best antivirus/security solution is always FIRST to use what is BETWEEN YOUR EARS, and always have a GOOD security suite with the latest updates. I personally use one which is one of (if not) the biggest (which I will NOT name to avoid any flame wars) which has served me well, because usually you become the biggest for GOOD reasons.
So in conclusion, this just re-confirms to me to AVOID Avast, and also ask the author to please remember to properly digitally sign all the main executables in installer distribution packages.
But being human and forgetting to digitally sign some executables occasionally should not be grounds for the whole distribution to be flagged as MALICIOUS etc. by some dumba$$ companies as previously mentioned
Peace
This is why I am posting because I believe I have the correct specific fundamental cause(s) to answer this topic precisely. I will present the facts and let everyone make their own decisions or opinions to hopefully correct and learn from them.
TC9 beta2 distribution files:
tc900x32_64_b2.exe
tc900x32_b2.exe
Sorry but the author has forgotten to add a valid digital signature to the two 32-bit TOTALCMD.EXE files, both the 64-bit TOTALCMD64.EXE files have valid digital signatures.
All TC9 beta3 distribution files have valid digital signatures for all TOTALCMD.EXE and TOTALCMD64.EXE files.
So I guess Avast (more on this later) is complaining about and deleting the embedded UNSIGNED 32-bit beta2 TOTALCMD.EXE files.
IMHO and from personal experience, I have tested a few releases of Avast and it has FAILED me on at least TWO occasions, so it belongs in the GARBAGE to me.
The best antivirus/security solution is always FIRST to use what is BETWEEN YOUR EARS, and always have a GOOD security suite with the latest updates. I personally use one which is one of (if not) the biggest (which I will NOT name to avoid any flame wars) which has served me well, because usually you become the biggest for GOOD reasons.
So in conclusion, this just re-confirms to me to AVOID Avast, and also ask the author to please remember to properly digitally sign all the main executables in installer distribution packages.
But being human and forgetting to digitally sign some executables occasionally should not be grounds for the whole distribution to be flagged as MALICIOUS etc. by some dumba$$ companies as previously mentioned

Peace

avast is mere more worse bullsh*tghisler(Author) wrote:I guess that this is the same bullsh*t detector as in Norton/Symantec Antivirus

"I used to feel guilty in Cambridge that I spent all day playing games, while I was supposed to be doing mathematics. Then, when I discovered surreal numbers, I realized that playing games IS math." John Horton Conway