It is currently Sat Nov 25, 2017 2:59 am

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 118 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:46 pm 
Offline
User
User

Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 6:17 pm
Posts: 31
Update - the bitdefender support replied and got the sample again today plus more detailed infos. Lets hope things improve - on a sidenote, the food example in the database help also triggered bitdefender and it reacted quite excited :)

ps: kcc if you notice this, please feel free to add a mad man animation who is super alerted running in circles ;)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:17 pm 
Offline
Addict
Addict

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 2:49 pm
Posts: 1027
blueznl wrote:
Cyclaan and eGambit

They sound like stand-up, quality software. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 1:14 pm 
Offline
User
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 1:40 am
Posts: 30
Location: United Kingdom
Just throwing a wild knife in the dark...

Do you get the same problem if you process the executable with UPX?

_________________
Regards!

Because things look better in Indigo!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 1:29 pm 
Offline
Addict
Addict

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 2:49 pm
Posts: 1027
IndigoFuzz wrote:
Do you get the same problem if you process the executable with UPX?

Yes. Virus-scanners know about UPX (and other compressors) and decompress them before scanning.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:07 pm 
Offline
User
User

Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 6:17 pm
Posts: 31
Virusscanners try to access archives or packed executables and UPX is well known by now. A way to block them from access would be for example to use a password on an archive. They dont try dictionary attacks on archives yet ;)

Keep in mind that any UPX or archive compression happens after the compilation and an active virus scanner usually already erased your false positive executable before you are able to convert/disguise/archive/process it.

UPX compression => reading executable into memory - process its structure, compress elements - write out new binary stream including decompression header + compressed elements. For more info see :

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/UPX
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compariso ... le_formats
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Executable

etc.

ps: that also makes selfwritten exe-compressors pointless, but we could probably use a replacement of the last stage of exe-creation to fool the antivirus software. But we aren't at that point yet, lets wait what happens.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 8:54 pm 
Offline
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:33 am
Posts: 138
I just discovered this thread topic.

Earlier this year (2017) I downloaded the Purebasic installer to my work computer.
Symantec immediately tagged it as some sort of virus or malware and removed it.
Then I got an email from the IT department regarding my offense of downloading dangerous software.
So now I can't use Purebasic at work.

Can this problem between Purebasic and Symantec be resolved?
It would help Purebasic become a more popular programming language.

_________________
Think Unicode!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 9:34 pm 
Offline
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:23 pm
Posts: 196
Location: Côtes d'Azur, France
It would be easier to talk with your IT. Make them understand what is purebasic and why it's tag as a virus.
It guys are usually friendly nerds maybe they will add Pb to their exception list.

Long time ago i used Pb on a usb key. I dont' know if it still work neither if you can plug usb key at work....

_________________
There are 2 methods to program bugless.
But only the third works fine.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:58 am 
Offline
Always Here
Always Here

Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 2:33 am
Posts: 5688
Location: Wales, UK
Quote:
Can this problem between Purebasic and Symantec be resolved?


It has been resolved before, but the poor quality control of almost all Anti-Virus software leads to false-positives springing-up again, for all sorts of applications, not only PB.

However, If you where working for me I would not be best pleased to hear that you had downloaded an executable independent of the IT department, who are there to run the company network and keep it as safe as possible.

What you should be doing is producing a (written) request for the IT guys to provide software that you need to do your work, with a brief on why your specific choices will be to the advantage of the company - given that all tech investment is ultimately governed by a budget. It's the IT department's responsibility to ensure safe installations.

This is not specifically a PB issue at all. No doubt the IT department have set Symantec up to prevent well-meaning Users from accidentally bringing the whole company network down by introducing a virus or opening a gateway to hackers.

_________________
IdeasVacuum
If it sounds simple, you have not grasped the complexity.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:21 pm 
Offline
User
User

Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 6:17 pm
Posts: 31
Thats probably the basic problem, the powerful ability to create anything including lowlevel system/network affecting software, makes PB potentially able to tear huge security holes into crucial company resources. Maybe its more realistic to tell the IT appartment what you try to achieve and ask them how they suggest you to do that.

Sadly their solution is unlikely to include the suggestion that you write a homebrew solutions with PB, but maybe they have a less potentially dangerous solution like a script language or maybe a mechanism to solve your problem with their own internally used company solution.

There is a tiny chance they see a huge use and you advance to the companies internal IT software development branch as CTO ;) ok its tiny but ...

Either way, work with them, not against them :)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:56 am 
Offline
User
User

Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 6:17 pm
Posts: 31
My antivirus subscription was about to expire, so i had to look for a replacement. Checked the usual AV rankings and installed kaspersky internet suite - no problems with purebasic, messagerequesters or tiny executables. So far the false positive problem didnt show up with any of the tests i did and kaspersky just works. If a problems arises, i will post in this thread again, but i hope i dont have to :)

Looks like kaspersky is actually doing their job and they even have a 30 day trial time.


Last edited by Bitblazer on Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:07 am 
Offline
Addict
Addict

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:04 pm
Posts: 1462
Location: Uttoxeter, UK
@Bitblazer,
I can concur.
Since installing Kaspersky, over 12 months ago, I've had no more issues with PureBasic.

_________________
DE AA EB


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:54 pm 
Offline
User
User

Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 6:17 pm
Posts: 31
Just got a Mail from bitdefender support, that they released an update for the signatures that should fix the PB problem. Too late for me but just in case anybody wants to know.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why I had to stop using PureBasic
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:22 pm 
Offline
Addict
Addict

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 2:49 pm
Posts: 1027
Bitblazer wrote:
Just got a Mail from bitdefender support, that they released an update for the signatures that should fix the PB problem. Too late for me but just in case anybody wants to know.

Here's a support email I got from a customer today, regarding BitDefender. :( Annoying as hell (the AV issue, not the customer).

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 118 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

 


Powered by phpBB © 2008 phpBB Group
subSilver+ theme by Canver Software, sponsor Sanal Modifiye