Avast allows copying of infected files!!!

[RayMan!]

With my NAV subscription coming to an end next week, I tested both
Avast and AVG freebies. Right from the start I liked the Avast user
interface better. All AV programs detected all kinds of viruses/worms
thrown at them.
However, when I tried to copy an infected file from floppy to C:, both
NAV and AVG denied access to the file! NAV offered to clean the
original file on A, which was nice. Avast on the other hand, allowed
the copying, and never alerted me to the fact the file was indeed
infected!
The only time I was notified by Avast was when I opened the folder
where the file was, the warning came, sirens rang.. and the file was
deleted!
What gives?
I have an unopened copy of NAV'04 sitting at my desk. I'm still
contemplating whether or not I should open it, especially after
reading that you get what you pay for..
Just my thought!!

Ray!

 

[Lars-Erik Østerud]

RayMan! skrev:

original file on A, which was nice. Avast on the other hand, allowed
the copying, and never alerted me to the fact the file was indeed

How have you setup avast? You can set it up to just check
executabeles when they are excecuted, or in addition when they
created/modified (this last option will catch copying as well)

For more info and questions try: http://www.avast.com/forum/

 

[optikl]

With my NAV subscription coming to an end next week, I tested both
Avast and AVG freebies. Right from the start I liked the Avast user
interface better. All AV programs detected all kinds of viruses/worms
thrown at them.
However, when I tried to copy an infected file from floppy to C:, both
NAV and AVG denied access to the file! NAV offered to clean the
original file on A, which was nice. Avast on the other hand, allowed
the copying, and never alerted me to the fact the file was indeed
infected!
The only time I was notified by Avast was when I opened the folder
where the file was, the warning came, sirens rang.. and the file was
deleted!
What gives?
I have an unopened copy of NAV'04 sitting at my desk. I'm still
contemplating whether or not I should open it, especially after
reading that you get what you pay for..
Just my thought!!

Ray!

Be warned. NAV 2004 is problematic for some users. Check Google archives
for more information.

 

[RayMan!]

With my NAV subscription coming to an end next week, I tested both
Avast and AVG freebies. Right from the start I liked the Avast user
interface better. All AV programs detected all kinds of viruses/worms
thrown at them.
However, when I tried to copy an infected file from floppy to C:, both
NAV and AVG denied access to the file! NAV offered to clean the
original file on A, which was nice. Avast on the other hand, allowed
the copying, and never alerted me to the fact the file was indeed
infected!
The only time I was notified by Avast was when I opened the folder
where the file was, the warning came, sirens rang.. and the file was
deleted!
What gives?
I have an unopened copy of NAV'04 sitting at my desk. I'm still
contemplating whether or not I should open it, especially after
reading that you get what you pay for..
Just my thought!!

Ray!

Apologies to Avast for what I've mentioned above! Turns out that NAV
had somehow mucked it up and prevented it from working properly. On a
new XP installation, with only Avast, the thing works like a charm,
denying access to the file (faster than NAV, I might add), and also
offering to clean the original file on A.
So there you go. Avast: free, lightweight, yet lethal!!!
Thanks to all who have replied to the original post..

Ray!

 

[lars]

I was using Norton AV, a corporate thing I got through my job,
since several years and it stopped quite a few viruses that
came through emails. But then I had the dreaded "realtime
protection failed to load" -thing and it wouldn´t repair
despite many reinstallations, so I gave up and installed Avast.

Several weeks went by without Avast warning anything in real
time about viruses, and I became a bit suspicious. So I
installed a trial version of Norton 2004. It immediately found
new viruses in mail attachments, often as zipped files.

I am not dumb enough to start executing file attachments whose
origins I am not certain of. So I do not know for sure if Avast
would have stopped me from running anything bad. But frankly I
would have preferred if Avast had stopped those files from
being written to my HD in the first place.

I am not totally sure I can trust Avast. Maybe it is just that
those two programs work differently?

Apologies to Avast for what I've mentioned above! Turns out that NAV
had somehow mucked it up and prevented it from working properly. On a
new XP installation, with only Avast, the thing works like a charm,
denying access to the file (faster than NAV, I might add), and also
offering to clean the original file on A.
So there you go. Avast: free, lightweight, yet lethal!!!
Thanks to all who have replied to the original post..

Lars
Stockholm

 

[me]

Apologies to Avast for what I've mentioned above! Turns out that NAV
had somehow mucked it up and prevented it from working properly. On a
new XP installation, with only Avast, the thing works like a charm,
denying access to the file (faster than NAV, I might add), and also
offering to clean the original file on A.
So there you go. Avast: free, lightweight, yet lethal!!!
Thanks to all who have replied to the original post..

Ray!

I'm currently a beta tester for Avast! antivirus products.
A;wil really do have a great chance of creating something good here,
its my personal opinion (as a Nod32 user) that Avast! DOES have the
potential to be in the top flight of AV products.

 

[optikl]

I'm currently a beta tester for Avast! antivirus products.
A;wil really do have a great chance of creating something good here, its
my personal opinion (as a Nod32 user) that Avast! DOES have the
potential to be in the top flight of AV products.

So, as a beta tester you're testing the professional version of AVAST?

 

[Lars-Erik Østerud]

(e-mail address removed) skrev:

would have stopped me from running anything bad. But frankly I
would have preferred if Avast had stopped those files from
being written to my HD in the first place.

Have you enabled the scanning? I use avast! Home edition, and it warns
be about virsuses in e-mail attachements - even inside archives. But
of course you need to enable the e-mail scanner part.

Also you can enable on-access scanning of archives in the Home
edition, but you need to do some alterations inside avast.mdb
(more about that is at the Avast Forum on their homepage)

 

[MinnesotaKid]

I'm currently a beta tester for Avast! antivirus products.

A;wil really do have a great chance of creating something good here,
its my personal opinion (as a Nod32 user) that Avast! DOES have the
potential to be in the top flight of AV products.

Listen, EVERY AV product has "potential". The results are in the
performance. Unfortunately, Alwil's ratings on virusbulletin.com (8
passes, 18 fails) tells me that they are NOT living anywhere near up
to the level of a "Top Flight" AV product. NOD32, on the other hand,
is currently standing with 25 passes and 3 fails. Just a slight
difference there. Judge for yourself. My $.02

http://www.virusbulletin.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?avist.xml
http://www.virusbulletin.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?eset.xml

Thank you.

 

[Sam]

MinnesotaKid wrote ...

Listen, EVERY AV product has "potential". The results are in the
performance. Unfortunately, Alwil's ratings on virusbulletin.com (8
passes, 18 fails) tells me that they are NOT living anywhere near up
to the level of a "Top Flight" AV product. NOD32, on the other hand,
is currently standing with 25 passes and 3 fails. Just a slight
difference there. Judge for yourself. My $.02

http://www.virusbulletin.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?avist.xml
http://www.virusbulletin.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?eset.xml

Thank you.

Isn't it also of importance how recently the 8 passes vs. the 18 fails
were recorded. For example, if all or most of the passes are more
recent than the fails doesn't that show that the product is improving
vastly? Also, if the past fails never get removed from the assessment it
will take many months or years before the 18 fails become insignificant.
After 10 more passes, the record will still be 18:18 and that stretches
back to 1998.

 

[optikl]

MinnesotaKid wrote ...



Isn't it also of importance how recently the 8 passes vs. the 18 fails
were recorded. For example, if all or most of the passes are more
recent than the fails doesn't that show that the product is improving
vastly? Also, if the past fails never get removed from the assessment it
will take many months or years before the 18 fails become insignificant.
After 10 more passes, the record will still be 18:18 and that stretches
back to 1998.

The above mentioned VBTN tests are *benchmarking* tests. Their value is
in seeing how products perform, over time. Trend data is of higher value
than the total number of pass/fails. Looking at the past 5 tests (12
months), a number of products have performed equally as well as NOD in
accurately detecting ITW samples. These tests offer value to the
developers, by providing them with data to see where they might look to
improve their products, and to end users, who can tell if the developer
of their chosen product is satisfactorily keeping up with ITW activity.
These tests do not capture data on the *total product experience*
(product design, ease of installation, impact on resources, support, etc.).

 

[Sam]

optikl wrote ...

These tests do not capture data on the *total product experience*
(product design, ease of installation, impact on resources, support, etc.).

Very good point - after all, by way of example, NAV seems to do extremely
well in the tests, over time, yet people (including myself) seem to be
increasingly unhappy with the total experience provided by Symantec in
relation to this product.

 

[RayMan!]

optikl wrote ...

Very good point - after all, by way of example, NAV seems to do extremely
well in the tests, over time, yet people (including myself) seem to be
increasingly unhappy with the total experience provided by Symantec in
relation to this product.

I've used NAV for years, and recommended it to tons of people.. Not
anymore though.. Its footprint has become enormous, quite heavy on
system resources... Add to that the insult of having to register with
Symantec to start using it, knowing that it will expire in one year..!