Perhaps it’s not clear the order in which things happen:

  1. False positive is detected in a trusted tool.

  2. Avast blocks the run of the tool and moves it to the Chest, stopping the user’s work.

  3. User evaluates the detection carefully and determines it’s a false positive.

  4. User ensures the false positive is reported and, because he needs to use the tool, chooses Restore and exclude.

  5. Some time later Avast alters the software so that the false positive is no longer detected.

  6. User has to remember to remove the exclusion in order to have Avast return to its most protective state.

It’s item 6 I’d like to see automated.

Is the misunderstanding here borne from there being some folks who live, eat, and breathe Avast maintenance, vs. others just wanting to get their work done? I’m truly at a loss to understand how anyone could argue against making the software more automatically protective.

-Noel