Avast silent mode problem...

Avast silent mode problem...
Secure Home | Search | About
Login Password
Register Now! Lost Password?
 Computer Software Security    Post an article   get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content add this group's latest topics to your Google content
Subject Author Date
Avast silent mode problem... Ricardo 09-25-2007
Posted by Ricardo on September 25, 2007, 3:38 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Configuring Avast Home Edition I happened on a cool option called "Silent
mode". If I get it right, is is supposed to automatically do the job in case
of a certain problem, e.g. virus found without bugging the user. However if
you switch the "Solent mode" on then another problem arises, whethter to
choose "With general answer YES (OK)" or "With general answer NO (Cancel)".
How do I interpret the two?! Which is more safe and restrictive? I am
interested in a silent mode killing everything suspicious (even if there is
some risk of a mistake) without bothering the user. I am afraid that some
unexperienced users may unintentionally let a virus into the system. Is it
possible to switch off any kind of Avast interaction with the user?
Regards,

--
Ricardo



Posted by Sebastian G. on September 25, 2007, 4:20 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Ricardo wrote:

> Configuring Avast Home Edition I happened on a cool option called "Silent
> mode". If I get it right, is is supposed to automatically do the job in case
> of a certain problem, e.g. virus found without bugging the user. However if
> you switch the "Solent mode" on then another problem arises, whethter to
> choose "With general answer YES (OK)" or "With general answer NO (Cancel)".
> How do I interpret the two?! Which is more safe and restrictive?


This is a totally stupid idea. A virus scanner is an intrusion detection
system and should give the user a loud and clear alert if it detects something.

> I am interested in a silent mode killing everything suspicious (even if
> there is some risk of a mistake) without bothering the user.

That's even more stupid. You're even trying the delete the only evidence of
a compromise?

> I am afraid that some unexperienced users may unintentionally let a virus
> into the system.

The do something against viruses, f.e. implementing a whitelist policy for
programs. A virus scanner, however, won't protect against viruses.

Posted by Ricardo on September 25, 2007, 5:20 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Ricardo wrote:
>
>> Configuring Avast Home Edition I happened on a cool option called "Silent
>> mode". If I get it right, is is supposed to automatically do the job in
>> case of a certain problem, e.g. virus found without bugging the user.
>> However if you switch the "Solent mode" on then another problem arises,
>> whethter to choose "With general answer YES (OK)" or "With general answer
>> NO (Cancel)". How do I interpret the two?! Which is more safe and
>> restrictive?
>
>
> This is a totally stupid idea. A virus scanner is an intrusion detection
> system and should give the user a loud and clear alert if it detects
> something.
Disagreed. Being the sys admin it is my job to check the logs and take care
of potential threats. I do not want to involve and stress an unexperienced
user who can do more harm than good.

> > I am interested in a silent mode killing everything suspicious (even if
> > there is some risk of a mistake) without bothering the user.
>
> That's even more stupid. You're even trying the delete the only evidence
> of a compromise?
Oh really?! And what if an unexperienced user chooses "No action" option
reacting to a virus alert? And what if an experienced user chooses such
option intentionally to compromise your system?!!! What do you say then,
wise guy, heh?!

Regards,
Ricardo


Posted by Sebastian G. on September 25, 2007, 7:35 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Ricardo wrote:


> Disagreed. Being the sys admin it is my job to check the logs and take care
> of potential threats. I do not want to involve and stress an unexperienced
> user who can do more harm than good.


But you want to run Avast? Better check for a product that fits the job much
better.

>>> I am interested in a silent mode killing everything suspicious (even if
>>> there is some risk of a mistake) without bothering the user.
>> That's even more stupid. You're even trying the delete the only evidence
>> of a compromise?
> Oh really?! And what if an unexperienced user chooses "No action" option
> reacting to a virus alert?


Why should this be a problem? Alert is alert.

> And what if an experienced user chooses such option intentionally to

> compromise your system?!!!

An experienced user would simply use a virus that doesn't get detected, at
best one that doesn't have any defined signature at all.

Posted by Ricardo on September 26, 2007, 4:46 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Ricardo wrote:
>
>
>> Disagreed. Being the sys admin it is my job to check the logs and take
>> care of potential threats. I do not want to involve and stress an
>> unexperienced user who can do more harm than good.
>
>
> But you want to run Avast? Better check for a product that fits the job
> much better.
Before I do that I want to make sure that this is really impossible with
Avast whose big advantage is that it is free and still has quite good
reputation. For a number of reasons that I am not going to elaborate on,
Avast just suits me. I posted a very concrete question concerning Avast
configuration. If you don't know the answer, which seem very much like that,
would you please stop that useless flaming and aggressive tone.

>>>> I am interested in a silent mode killing everything suspicious (even if
>>>> there is some risk of a mistake) without bothering the user.
>>> That's even more stupid. You're even trying the delete the only evidence
>>> of a compromise?
>> Oh really?! And what if an unexperienced user chooses "No action" option
>> reacting to a virus alert?
>
>
> Why should this be a problem? Alert is alert.
If an alert has a form of an interactive option, choosing "No action",
"Cancel", "Continue", "Ignore" or whatever you call it, instead of "Delete
file" or "Remove virus", can be a serious threat to the system. Is it so
complicated, you dummy?!

>> And what if an experienced user chooses such option intentionally to
>
> > compromise your system?!!!
>
> An experienced user would simply use a virus that doesn't get detected, at
> best one that doesn't have any defined signature at all.
There are different levels of experience, mind you. I am not in the zone
zero of the NATO Headquarters but in a small university subnet, having a
bunch of unexperienced users to protect, many a time against themselves. You
definitely lack imagination to get it and obviously try to build up your
sick ego on each and every occasion. Considering further discussion with you
completely useless I announce the EOT.
Regards,
Ricardo


Similar ThreadsPosted
Re: Microsoft criticized for silent patches April 21, 2006, 9:18 am
avast! or AVG September 25, 2005, 11:59 am
Avast questions June 25, 2005, 3:11 pm
Avast no longer supporting win 98 November 18, 2006, 10:54 pm
WPA_Kill.exe false positive in Avast? July 3, 2006, 7:02 pm
Error 502: Concurrent Connections Limit in Avast! July 5, 2007, 12:14 pm
problem in Using PGP January 20, 2006, 10:19 pm
AVG problem - please help February 26, 2006, 11:22 am
dshield problem August 26, 2005, 12:31 pm
Update Problem January 27, 2006, 7:22 am

The site map in XML format XML site map

Contact Us | Privacy Policy