Jump to content

Kolor

Retired Staff
  • Posts

    1,861
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

Posts posted by Kolor

  1. More likely as this is a PUP they are using a hash based system, others will base detection on what is found at the EP. Obviously there are other factors to consider when creating detections. Very few scanners however will use string based detection these days. They are too easily circumvented with a high likely hood of FP detections.

  2. Only 2 of those detections are actually FP's. The others are simply reporting potentially unwanted programs (PUP). Why? Because some network/IT admins would not appreciate IRC clients being used inside their corp networks, and also some malware uses mIRC as a propagation method/backdoor.

     

    If you scan any version of mIRC itself (or Xchat etc) you will see similar results:

    http://www.virustotal.com/analisis/57a008b2303d598cd7ce40d66f64da5b4b18f4e30d073e1ff14b19bea1a73ad3-1280256838

  3. I use norton, which no matter what people talk bad about it, it's a good program for those who know how to use it.

     

    This says it all really. Norton may have a reactive detection rate > 90% however with a proactive (heuristic) detection rate well below 50% it really is poor when it comes to personal security. Long gone are the days when a few 100 pieces of unique malware were collected per week, now AV companies are receiving hundreds of thousands per week, making static signature / wildcard sigs a thing of the past. Is the engines behavioural analysis is not up to scratch you are not protected.

×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.