i don’t know. you guys discuss it. i’m gonna watch ;D
Sorry, but is that meant for me? Not that I’m rude asking this, but, it seems that almost from the start that this thread has been off topic, including moderators. If they start or not, that’s one other different story, but they didn’t end it either. So, I wash my hands here.
I was just showing what reality is. And, in this reality, the simple truth is that tools like Defense+ are not needed, they cause confusion and they’re as beaten as a dead cow.
One thing would be for one those tools to have a tremendous white-listing, hence not breaking normal functionality of a system with unneeded alerts that the user would end up allowing. Only leaving room for alerts for what really matters - unknown processes. And, by unknown, I don’t mean unknown just because a tool like this lacks a great white-listing database.
Anyway… my post was meant to say that this thread is useless, and that’s why I mentioned it got my attention. All this versus that never ends well. And is so easy to protect a system without all that nonsense tools like HIPS, which most cause more confusion to users than protection.
And, from personal experience, I’ve seen people bashing some anti-viruses that can’t keep up with malware as others do, but when major threats come out I don’t see the big guys standing up… Most of the time are the ones that people keep bashing that protect users.
Very recently Finjan found a botnet of 1.9 million infected computers. At the time only AVG (almost always bashed), DrWeb, NOD32 (also constantly bashed) and Panda (also constantly bashed) were protecting people against this botnet, or preventing users from becoming part of this botnet.
I’m sure I’d find other examples with time.
So, where are the big guys like Symantec, Kaspersky, McAfee? Do you understand where I want to get from this comment of mine?
TODAY yours may not detect something… and maybe its not even a major threat, but TOMORROW it may detect something others won’t, and it may happen to be a major threat.
Just a small comment : we have moderators that moderate the topics, and we have moderators that can join the topic.
I joined, Ganda is moderating. This is just to make sure that they stay on the sideline 
Xan
huh ??? i thought we’re going good-cop bad-cop today ??? ;D
eh, nevermind,continue !ot!
PM sent to br0k3n
I did mention FP's. Keygens ? That's illegal in the first place LOL
I think this would be flame bait material at FTN (FTN is a different place from here). LOL. Anyways, 99% of the good keygens will pass virustotal.com. (:CLP) Infected keygens never pass. 
At the time only AVG (almost always bashed), DrWeb, NOD32 (also constantly bashed) and Panda (also constantly bashed) were protecting people against this botnet, or preventing users from becoming part of this botnet
My ideas on why certian (AV programs are getting bashed) after being around the p2p scene for years and also been around since they had underground BBS boards(Mid-1980’s). So here’s what I see
1)AVG will flag good keygens and patchs, not just the infected ones. I’ve read that alot of people liked the older avg versions (7.5). Starting at version 8, is when it really started getting bashed heavily. It’s also hard (IMO) to get AVG to ignore files or folders
2)For Dr Web, ??? I never really heard of anyone bashing this, let alone using it
3)NOD32, It seems only the NOD32 version 4 is getting most of the bashs
4)Panda, This is not very friendly with some of the security products out there, It’s also a memory hog, IMO
I hope comodo doesn’t follow the AVG way when it comes to P2P stuff. Negative comments spread a hell of alot faster then positive comments.
*****For comodo, UPX packer is the most popular packer in P2P Torrents. Please don’t flag it ONLY just because the files are using UPX.
Just my .02$
Personally, I believe that the anti-malware industry shouldn’t be detecting anything in patches, keygens, cracks.
This is like saying - Hey folks, keep making use of pirated software and we’ll do our best protecting your back!
If I were the anti-malware industry I’d be excluding all the possible keygens, patches, etc from their database, as in adding them to a while list database.
But, I guess they aren’t that bad people, after all. But, people do tend to use illegal copies of their own tools, though.
Wonderful life… uh?
So that leads us to a dilemma - Inderectly promote pirating or fight huge botnet and zombie PC networks ;D
If I were the anti-malware industry I'd be excluding all the possible keygens, patches, etc from their database, as in adding them to a while list databaseI have no problem AV companys flagging infected ones though
I can understand an AV company flagging keygens or patchs for there own AV products (clean patchs or infected patchs)
I can’t blame AVG for flagging a “AVG keygen”
That type of stuff isn’t too bad. A good example
Kaspersky is a popular torrent. After a few months to a year, some people like kaspersky to the point, They actually go buy it,
But ALSO There is a certain type of people that will never buy the product no matter what, if they can’t get a patch, they just won’t use the product. They’ll use something else or a freeware. I feel a patch is a different kind of nudge to get these type of people to buy it. If at that point , they still don’t buy it after a years use of it. I say their either poor, can’t afford it but still want it or just a very cheap bastard.
They probably have a hard time sorting out “legit cracks” from malwares… =/ many cracks writes to the registry, write to other files/replaces them bla bla… Something that a virus for instance might do to be harder to get rid off. Also many signatures are auto generated. I guess FP in cracks and similar is unfortunately something we will have to accept to some degree… =O
Also regarding 3.9 just the AV Iam confident CIS is not as good as the top players regarding detection just yet… But Iam sure that will change… =)
And that, is indeed a dilemma. They had to choose a side. If deciding not to, indirectly, promote pirating, then they’d stay behind in the fight and would have no profits. They’re all in this for the profit, in one way or another.
The only alternative is for the security vendors to make it harder to ■■■■■ their software. But, someone may just ■■■■■ it again… That would leave one other alternative, which is to stop providing trial versions. Then again, all counts to the statistics, pirated or not.
And, that’s why this is a wonderful life…
I thought its pretty simple,
if the patch pactches the programi so it can work and does nothing else then it’s good to go :-TU
if the patch patches the program so it can work and BUT does other stuff other then flagg it