They must provide a tool for those affected... and henceforth demonstrate that it is a safe program.
It's just a bit more than frustrating when learning resources are consolidated here at Malwaretips for user convenience and education - right at the fingertips - and very few bother to avail themselves of any of the resources.Blah. I bet no one posting in this thread has ever owned a business, or had a clue.
Surely when Avast acquired CCcleaner/Piriform they also inherit the responsibility of the software, you don't get to pick and choose which bits you want to keep, it's a package.NO.It is not avast's fault.They just acquired a company (Piriform).It is Piriform's fault.
Well, Cisco Talos is using this ''event'' for some marketing and manipulations to make some cashIntersting ..!
Cisco's Talos Intelligence Group Blog: CCleanup: A Vast Number of Machines at Risk
This is a prime example of the extent that attackers are willing to go through in their attempt to distribute malware to organizations and individuals around the world. By exploiting the trust relationship between software vendors and the users of their software, attackers can benefit from users' inherent trust in the files and web servers used to distribute updates. In many organizations data received from commonly software vendors rarely receives the same level of scrutiny as that which is applied to what is perceived as untrusted sources. Attackers have shown that they are willing to leverage this trust to distribute malware while remaining undetected. Cisco Talos continues to monitor all aspects of the threat landscape to quickly identify new and innovative techniques used by attackers to target organizations and individuals around the world.
Avast say there's no need to restore your system:Hi
I choose "Provide a specific removal tool, because Talos (security experts) advise image recovery"
we don't consider the advice to reformat and/or restore the affected machines to the pre-August 15 state to be based on facts (by similar logic, security companies are not usually advising customers to reformat their machines after a remote code execution vulnerability is identified on their computer, just because there was a hypothetical possibility that something might have gotten in).