I actually do think I don’t need to be protected against scams, since I don’t ever pay online and I don’t have internet banking. Most of the “thought to be scams” warnings are just annoying to me and I need to set whole server as an exception to access them, which makes me vulnerable to potential viruses there.
I suspect so - if so expand post in that topic and don’t create duplicates
As I said in your other topic:
Unfortunately there just isn't enough information to give a specific answer.
The most helpful would have been a screenshot of the Avast Alert with the Details option selected and attached to the post.
This gives an idea of what the issue and what may be done, given what you said in your other topic:
Is it possible to somehow explain to avast that I want to access the page itself, but without it immediately ignoring everything what's going on there?
What I’m trying to find out is what is this scam warning you mention. I must lead a sheltered life as I can’t recall any scam warning from Avast, hence requests for more detailed information and or a screenshot of the Scam Warning.
I honestly don’t feel ignored, I was just quoting what you had said in the other topic.
This may or may not be what Avast is alerting for - but the site should certainly address this.
However there is nothing stopping you from adding the domain name to the Avast Exceptions at your own risk - Avast User Interface > Menu > General > Exceptions > Add Website.
See attachment below, click to expand for an example.
See? This is why I didn’t answer in the previous topic.
It’s not like I’m saying it’s a false alarm or I don’t trust the Avast team judgement, I’m asking if there is some kind of settings where I can turn off protection against all the scams, since I don’t think I need it.
I don’t want to sound like a jerk, since you willingly spent your time to help me and I’m really thankful, but this is not the answer to my question.
Completely agree with OP, don’t need and antivirus to FORBID ME from entering a website just because it may be a scam … you may WARN me but not completely abort a connection.
And it’s ridiculous to offer the Exclusion alternative since the site itself may be riddled with other threats that I do want the antivirus to protect me from.
Just like the “Phishing” thing … I am an adult, warn me and allow me to continue if I want to. What’s next … banning porn and gaming sites ? ffs!!!
Now I can’t access my movie site because it may be a scam. Are you planning on banning auto dealerships and banks too ?
Again, warn and allow to continue … a scam is not a technological thing that I need to be protected from. Cookies? What about you acting as MITM between all my traffic which disables whatsapp url preview feature.
Low security risk. Riddled with ads and viruses that Avast faithfully and succsefully adresses and had no issues whatsoever for the past couple of years. Now a SCAM alert shows up and I cant even access the website entirely unless I’m willing to disable the entire thing for this website !!!
It’s akin to a hospital denying service based on vaccine status … you have a deep cut on your arm and you’re bleedin to death … well … in order to treat you you either get a covid vaccine or go elsewhere. wtf Avast!
Suspicious websites should not be blocked. It either has a confirmed malware/virus threat that requires to be blocked or not.
Furthermore, https://unmask.sucuri.net/security-report/?page=solarmovie.pe clearly states that what it find suspicious is a javascript code it is unable to understand JAVASCRIPT !!! most one can do with javascript is xss/cookies injection and tracking … ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that Avast can not handle or that will harm the users computer … so why would it FORBID ME from accessing the website in it’s entirety ?
Avast should not block websites based on a hunch. I just installed Avira and navigated to that same site without any issue whatsoever.
Avast should not block ANY websites at all. It shuld only either warn that there is a website with a malware/virus that Avast is unable to block/treat or simply allow access and block all threats from within (as it has always done).
Since when are we in the business of preventing to a point of not even granting access “just in case” there MAY be a threat.
Also, since when are we in the business of blocking “human threats” linke phishing. WTF! Avast is not a “parental control” software. It is meant to deal with malware/virus (software based) threats. For all other “threats” it may warn but it should never ever forcefully stop you from accesing a website.
ps.- When are you guys going to correctly update the Verification Questions for this forum? What is current year?: 2024 wrong 2023 ok !!
Suspicious websites should not be blocked. It either has a confirmed malware/virus threat that requires to be blocked or not.
Furthermore, https://unmask.sucuri.net/security-report/?page=solarmovie.pe clearly states that what it find suspicious is a javascript code it is unable to understand JAVASCRIPT !!! most one can do with javascript is xss/cookies injection and tracking … ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that Avast can not handle or that will harm the users computer … so why would it FORBID ME from accessing the website in it’s entirety ?
No one say that this is the reason for avast block
I just installed Avira and navigated to that same site without any issue whatsoever.
Please correct me … is avast an antivirus software or a fancy blocklisting firewall ? All other antivirus will let you in and protect you from the virus by stopping the virus execution not restricting your access to the website entirely.
Reverse engineering a JavaScript obfuscated dropper
July 31, 2017
by Antonio Cocomazzi
“Nowadays one of the techniques most used to spread malware on windows systems
is using a JavaScript (js) dropper. A js dropper represents, in most attack
scenarios, the first stage of a malware infection.”
A careful reading of the reports suggests that JavaScript files may be crafted
in such a way as to avoid - or at least complicate - detection of malicious
intent by security software. Obfuscation is one factor. Another is that JS
code that is not directly malicious may be the precursor to the installation of
actual malware, rather than posing an immediate malevolent action. In such cases
the entire cascading chain of events that begins when the script is executed
must be followed and analyzed, when possible.
Detection of any type of dangerous or malevolent threat is not as simple as some
users may assume. That’s why no security software is capable of catching 100%
of threats 100% of the time. Some trojans, worms, etc. evade detection when
first encountered by security solutions.
Also a tradeoff has to be made between maximum blocking and moderately
permissive acceptance, so as not to block legitimate activities. Consider
the case of keyloggers. Some are used for very legitimate reasons on some
computers, at some sites. A blanket blockage of all loggers would impede
their use in these cases, requiring special interaction by the end user
such as setting exceptions (where possible).
There are tradeoffs between performance and maximal security, such as
in the level of heuristic analysis, etc. that can impact the success
of security software in particular cases. A zero-trust approach will
necessitate much more user interaction and decision-making than many
users will want or are capable of conducting in a knowledgable way.
There is a delicate balance between false positives and missed detections.
So yes, Avast protects against malicious scripts, keyloggers, worms, trojans,
etc. But it is never as simple as swatting flies.