Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Security Apps
Other security for Windows, Mac, Linux
Bouncer - Discussion & Support Thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="vertigo" data-source="post: 726534" data-attributes="member: 70928"><p>As far as the random detections, I made the mistake of testing out the VIPRE Rescue Tool (I won't ever use anything from that company after that except as a last resort) which quarantined many files while leaving other, similar ones alone. For example, I had a bunch of Android .apk files from old backups, and it would say one version of an app was infected while another version or two it would ignore. I thought that was quite strange.</p><p></p><p>And I'm in agreement with Opcode: it wouldn't surprise me if some of the AV companies are intentionally flagging it for competitive reasons, but I doubt that's the case for most of them. I doubt this program is a big enough presence for them to care at all about, especially the bigger companies. I could be entirely incorrect, but I suspect it has to do with their software thinking Bouncer is malware based on what it does and how it does it, not taking into consideration the <em>reasoning</em> for it. In fact, Bouncer being such a low-profile program probably not only means it doesn't get attention from the big players for competitive reasons, but also that it most likely doesn't get attention for making sure it's white-listed to prevent being flagged for what would be suspicious coding and behavior if not for its purpose. Similarly, I suspect the reason many/most AV programs aren't flagged by most of the others due to their nature is due to white-listing. And Bouncer probably just didn't make the list.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="vertigo, post: 726534, member: 70928"] As far as the random detections, I made the mistake of testing out the VIPRE Rescue Tool (I won't ever use anything from that company after that except as a last resort) which quarantined many files while leaving other, similar ones alone. For example, I had a bunch of Android .apk files from old backups, and it would say one version of an app was infected while another version or two it would ignore. I thought that was quite strange. And I'm in agreement with Opcode: it wouldn't surprise me if some of the AV companies are intentionally flagging it for competitive reasons, but I doubt that's the case for most of them. I doubt this program is a big enough presence for them to care at all about, especially the bigger companies. I could be entirely incorrect, but I suspect it has to do with their software thinking Bouncer is malware based on what it does and how it does it, not taking into consideration the [I]reasoning[/I] for it. In fact, Bouncer being such a low-profile program probably not only means it doesn't get attention from the big players for competitive reasons, but also that it most likely doesn't get attention for making sure it's white-listed to prevent being flagged for what would be suspicious coding and behavior if not for its purpose. Similarly, I suspect the reason many/most AV programs aren't flagged by most of the others due to their nature is due to white-listing. And Bouncer probably just didn't make the list. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top