Jump to content

Kronzky

Members
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kronzky

  • Rank
    New Member
  1. So, you still won't tell me what exactly triggered the false alarm, and you also won't tell me what the "fix" consisted of? But — you are telling that I should adjust my programming, in order to accommodate your faulty detection mechanism??? Yeah, that seem like a great solution. I used to recommend your software to any client who asked me. Guess not anymore...
  2. Well... I scanned it yesterday (after I was told it was fixed), and I scanned it again just now, but it's still giving a false positive (in both cases your software went through the update process first, so I assume it had had the latest definitions). Also, what was this "fix"? Did you just put my program's name (or "fingerprint") on some whitelist? And if so, what happens if I change it, or use the same libraries/methods/whatever it was that cause the false positive again, in some other program? That was the first place I looked when I came upon this issue, but it only contains some very generic guidelines. What exactly was triggering the false positive in *my particular* program is what I would like to know.
  3. Would you mind telling me what triggered the warning (so I can avoid it in the future)? Also, if you say it "has been fixed" - what does that mean in terms of definition updates (i.e. how long until this fix will be available)?
  4. A simple AutoIt script I wrote myself (and which isn't doing anything weird) is blocked as malware (MachineLearning/Anomalous.97%) MW.log exe.zip
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies - We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.