He is the scenario - you launch an app, Avast thinks it is suspicious and takes it out. Well, that’s only good news when Avast is correct. When Avast is incorrect, it doesn’t return everything back in place as though nothing happened, it leaves a mess for you to clear-up.
This what happened to me just now: I launched a well-known CAD-CAM app from it’s desktop icon. Avast intercepted, declaring that a threat had been detected. The app is not a threat, but Avast has removed the desktop icon. I made a new icon. I selected the app in the Virus Chest with rmc ‘Restore and Add to Exclusions’. Re-launch the app, Avast intercepts again.
So, I’m in a hurry to verify some data in the app, my colleague is online waiting. What can I do? Disable the Avast Shields! It’s a risk, but the the data info is important.
How could Avast be improved? At the moment of interception, Avast should ask the User what action to take, one of the options would be ‘add to exclusion list and continue’, leaving everything as-is.
By the way - am I the only one that really struggles to get past this forum’s captcha? I suggest using ‘drag and drop captcha’. It is easier for the Forum Users and impossible for the bots.
By the way - am I the only one that really struggles to get past this forum's captcha?
Spam protection ..... only first 3 posts ;)
He is the scenario - you launch an app, Avast thinks it is suspicious and takes it out. Well, that's only good news when Avast is correct.
So what is best, letting real malware slipp true sometimes, or detecting a clean file as infected now and then ? it is a tricky balance the malware lab try to achive here
How could Avast be improved? At the moment of interception, Avast should ask the User what action to take, one of the options would be 'add to exclusion list and continue', leaving everything as-is.
That is already a option in the settings. if avast automatically remove, fix or is doing something else depends on the settings you have made.
'Restore and Add to Exclusions'. Re-launch the app, Avast intercepts again.
That means not everything that you want was added to the exclusion list or you have it disabled.
Example;
you can add a link to a icon in the exclusion list but that only will exclude the link, not the application that is supposed to start.
Hi IdeasVacuum, its little bit OT, but what makes you think that avast was not correct in this case?
Maybe if you tell me name of the detection, avast is reporting, i can tell you more about this problem.
It is possible that your application is harmless, but even link can be malicious.
Avast doesn’t like the executables of ZWSOFT’s ZW3D CAD-CAM (of which there are many, it is a large program) and VX Corp, the predecessor of ZWSOFT. The folks that have responded to my post may not be familiar with this type of app, or indeed with the scenario I have described. Some of the earlier exe files are prefixed with ‘vx’, and functions within the apps may also be prefixed with ‘vx’. In the distant past, we had an AV that made an association between these names and the gas ‘VX’ and on that basis alone decided the CAD-CAM app was dangerous!
So what makes me think Avast is not correct in this case? I have used these apps for years and years and they are produced and distributed by a highly trusted development team.
A simple but effective solution could be adding the entire folder of that software to the global exclusion list.
I think that is the best route in this case, but in fact Avast sometimes ignores folder exclusion and zaps the applications mid-launch anyway. The content of the folders is updated over time, maybe that has something to do with it.
