FMA Intel-Secure: (CCSU PR-Guard) Edition 2015

[Nico@FMA]

CCSU Guard EYE Anti-Malware Module has been updated to version: 1.1.1.3

Fixes:
1: Better scanning sequence (Scan was having trouble with some files.
2: Fixed removal option to be a bit more strict (Thanks Kram for pointing it out)
3: Fixed update checking system.

Update:
Removed double instance option (It should not be able to run duplicated)
Added new signatures.
Updated some grammar errors and internal functions.

Cheers

 

[LabZero]

SUD to Webroot this FP
Threats detected

 

[Nico@FMA]

SUD to Webroot this FP
Threats detected
View attachment 58599

Thanks.

 

[FireShootSK]

Chrome detect program as unwanted program.

 

[Nico@FMA]

Chrome detect program as unwanted program.
View attachment 58602

Yes i have received a similar report because my file has low reputation.
I just do not know where at google i can submit my file to change that.

 

[Nico@FMA]

To everyone reading this: Unless i am mistaken (please correct me if wrong) but my site is clean and legit, and does have SSL for those who want it.
My software is 10000000% clean as stated by everyone ever used it, and is proven by every malware scanner.
That being said Google Chrome URL scanner, seems to NOT like my executable and its being blocked or flagged as potentially harmfull.
Obviously this is a false positive but i cannot find ANYWHERE that allows me to contact Google regarding this issue.
So while i would not advise this, i would say that turning off the feature within Chrome will save many of us alot of grief.
There are much better URL scanners out there and so far everyone with the exception of Chrome scanner class my software as CLEAN.
Now since Chrome is using VT as their URL engine and is owner of VT it is mind bobbling to see that they are blocking my downloads while everyone is reporting me as clean.
So please help me out here as i am in a loss here and have no idea what to do.

Cheers

 

[Nico@FMA]

LOL... so what is Chrome bitching about?

 

[bitbizket]

Saw your post here. https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/zXDeWxr612Q

Find similar problem which may give you some idea what's happening and how to resolve.
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/r-9JQIboUmc

Chrome sucks. Fine another reason not to use Chrome.
In the end its all about bu$$ineSS and $hit.

 

[Deleted member 21043]

https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/zXDeWxr612Q

"Our software is obviously clean of malware or any other garbage which is verified by the fact its digitally signed (self signed) and due to the fact that Virus total classes our website and software as clean." - malicious software and adware/PUPs can be digitally signed.

FMA Intel-Secure CCSU PR-Guard is safe. It is not malicious software. I hope these FP detections are all fixed soon, Jiangmin detect one of the versions of the EYE Antimalware scanner according to VT: https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/...4e9f3d27146f24746cbe61a8/analysis/1432500823/

Chrome sucks. Fine another reason not to use Chrome.
In the end its all about bu$$ineSS and $hit.

I don't understand how Chrome picking up a False Positive detection makes it bad (FPs are normal to occur now and then). It's not all about business. They are trying to keep their users secure. They are clearly not aware of FMA Intel-Secure and/or their intentions yet. Do you know how much work Google really do on a day-to-day basis? For your information, many other security software was detecting FMA Intel-Secure PR-Guard, but this doesn't make them bad products. Think of all the infections Chrome stopped people receiving.

@Nico@FMA I can download CCSU PR-Guard from the official FMA Intel-Secure website perfectly fine on Chrome without any issues.

 

[Nico@FMA]

"Our software is obviously clean of malware or any other garbage which is verified by the fact its digitally signed (self signed) and due to the fact that Virus total classes our website and software as clean." - malicious software and adware/PUPs can be digitally signed.

Uhmm sure but malicious software does not submit itself to every single AV every release, i do. Also Virus Total is owned by Google, Chrome uses VR Url engine for their Chrome plugin and VT classes our software as clean, so is it me, or is the Chrome URL scanner a bit weird?

Anyway as you said, Google has lots of work, and FP's happen yet being selective in what software they white list also happens.
Not saying it is with me, but i know for a fact that there are companies out there that even if they would a digital atomic bomb download then Chrome will not block it. Regardless if the company is good or bad, yes Google is doing their stuff in a funky way as has been pointed out by many wissle blowers.
In regards to the Chrome url scanner, they should have a submit option and they should be reachable, both on twitter, facebook and on their own google+ (And webmaster tools) there are thousands of topic's including legit downloads that get busted for no reason, and the google staff is not helping either.
I just hope that my case gets solved. Because it annoys the F out of me, that some members have a alert about my software while its 10000% clean. While sometimes Google Chrome allows a download that is so packed with malware that one can trip over it.

I like the URL scanner, yet in Microsoft's defense i like their smart screen better, not to mention that most URL scanners of AV brands are light years ahead of that Dumb chrome thing.
But thats my opinion lol

 

[bitbizket]

Kram, i do understand what you're saying and i'm aware how much Google has done. But if you spend your time browsing, Chrome do flag false detection quite often not only in applications but also urls. It is also difficult for someone to directly report to Google for false positives. I remember years back how some antivirus program like Norton is a pain to small time developers, ask the developer of NirSoft.

You'll probably have your own reason for liking Chrome and i am aware of your reasoning. There are different reasons why i don't like having Chrome which i'm not going into details about them. Honestly i feels more secure with my current browser than having Chrome.
It's a matter of opinion anyway to me Chrome does sucks.

I do repairs as my part-time job and have done over 2000+ repairs in between. Most of the time my customers end up with the most issues with this browser in comparison to the one with Gecko based browser. I'm sure some others like me who do repairs will noticed it too.

Google Chrome is still most used browser in the world and why do you think Google want to monopolize the browser market? How many of these taking into account are force installations? Sure they do have an opt out instead of an opt-in but many are click happy. Being popular does have its negative too, you know.

In bussiness perspective you don't buy something without thinking the benefits on the long run. Sure buying VT to make Google Chrome more secure, that was the attention would that be the only reason?

When comes to large corporation like Google or Microsoft there is some form interconnection with their affiliate partners. It's like bee's infratructure exchange all going round in circles. You may not notice them its all around us. I think someone else will understand it better what i mean by business especially corporate bussiness in particular.

Thanks

 

[bitbizket]

Well back to topic.

All good here no false positives using Cybefox with ESET SS.

The PPA analysis really performs faster as it takes hours to complete on a Pentium 4 machine.
Now it took nearly one and the half hour to complete.
It would be better if the whole 5 steps analysis is done in one full sweep instead doing them manually each.

However during Network Analysis session - this reset my Wireless Network on a Non-DHCP custom settings.
I have to reconfigure my adapter settings before i can re-connect to my internet.

I'm curious why you pick CNET over Softpedia.
I believed MajorGeeks and Softpedia are the two most trusted file hosts.

Regarding the idea of having Swiss Army Knife edition, i reccommended you take a peak to some of the excellent security tools on this site. The fun part this site does not support Chrome browser to download their tools. Ring a bell?
http://securityxploded.com/tools.php

 

[Nico@FMA]

Well back to topic.

All good here no false positives using Cybefox with ESET SS.

The PPA analysis really performs faster as it takes hours to complete on a Pentium 4 machine.
Now it took nearly one and the half hour to complete.
It would be better if the whole 5 steps analysis is done in one full sweep instead doing them manually each.

However during Network Analysis session - this reset my Wireless Network on a Non-DHCP custom settings.
I have to reconfigure my adapter settings before i can re-connect to my internet.

I'm curious why you pick CNET over Softpedia.
I believed MajorGeeks and Softpedia are the two most trusted file hosts.

Regarding the idea of having Swiss Army Knife edition, i reccommended you take a peak to some of the excellent security tools on this site. The fun part this site does not support Chrome browser to download their tools. Ring a bell?
http://securityxploded.com/tools.php

Yes PPA does run much faster thanks to a bunch of tweaks, yet the steps are there for a reason, on large systems you do not want a full sweep but sometimes a partial sweep hence why the steps are made.
In regards to S-Exploded great site yet my swiss army tool is going a different direction.

Thanks for your comments.

 

[Nico@FMA]

Well well.

16 requests trough the official channels of Avira, NO reply nothing + 5 days waiting.
One personal twitter to their support for everyone to read = fixed in less then 6 hours.

 

[Secondmineboy]

That shouldnt happen at all :/

Avira is really slow sometimes

 

[Nico@FMA]

That shouldnt happen at all :/

Avira is really slow sometimes

Works for me tho...

 

[Nico@FMA]

Update 10.1.10.20
CCSU guard and EYE have been updated and uses now full HTTPS secure connections. (Also the website uses now strictly https)
We fixed some bugs and decreased resource usage.

Cheers

 

[Deleted member 178]

send me a Win8 version when ready lol

 

[Nico@FMA]

send me a Win8 version when ready lol

Windows 8 (8.1) has been skipped. We will not create any software for that specially with the planned free windows 10 update in mind.
I talked to Microsoft some time ago because i did have some technical issues during development, and they said i should forget windows 8 and move on.
Which i very happy did.

 

[Deleted member 178]

Which i very happy did.

lol, so i will wait Win10 version