Avast's huge screw up.

[SJConsultant]

A handful of system files getting flagged (And the update was removed after 10 minutes, if that's worth anything) is a huge difference between HUNDREDS of files getting flagged.

We had a handful of machines that it DID effect. Just because that thread isn't filled with as many users complaining about it doesn't mean it didn't have just as an adverse effect.

10 Minutes sounds like a small window, but alot of damage can be done in that timeframe.

 

[k1pp3r]

How did you miss my prior post with a link?

False positive of certain Windows System files in March of 2009

By skim reading, i'll have to go back and look at it.

 

[TechieSooner]

We had a handful of machines that it DID effect. Just because that thread isn't filled with as many users complaining about it doesn't mean it didn't have just as an adverse effect.

10 Minutes sounds like a small window, but alot of damage can be done in that timeframe.

10 minutes is an extreemly small window compared to the five and a half hours it took Avast.


Again- foal, horse.

 

[number69]

Based on what criteria?

His own, whatever that is.

 

[number69]

Well for one Eset has never deleted Windows System files

Avast didn't either, the idiots who selected delete did. The system file thing wasn't that widespread from what I read after I posted my first post which started this thread. Avast is on I think 100,000,000 systems. You have several threads about 2-5 pages long on their forums from about the same 30 people having issues and complaining about this incident. Think about that. It really wasn't as huge a deal as I originally thought. So thinking this brings Avast down to AVG level is ridiculous.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

A handful of system files getting flagged (And the update was removed after 10 minutes, if that's worth anything... Avast took over five and a half hours) is a huge difference between HUNDREDS of files getting flagged.

I'm not familiar with Avasts default settings for definition update checks and downloads...so it's hard to compare without knowing those.

But to be honest with you, I"ll take 5 thousand users who have sound 'n NIC drivers 'n Adobe software problems, over 50 users spread across 5 states with windows sytems that fail to boot up.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Adding some thought, I wonder what the percentage of Avast users are using just the "free" version? To me, FPs from a product that is strictly "pay for" is much more unacceptable than FP issues from a freebie product. Freebie product = use at your own risk with minimal..if any..support.

 

[TechieSooner]

But to be honest with you, I"ll take 5 thousand users who have sound 'n NIC drivers 'n Adobe software problems, over 50 users spread across 5 states with windows sytems that fail to boot up.

I'm not sure I would...
Windows can easily be repaired- your data cannot.
Sooooooooooooooo


And those 50 users would take less time to fix than the 5,000 software problems IMO.


To each his own but 50 workstations needing a DLL replaced is a ton easier to fix than 5,000 machines needing multiple files replaced each.

 

[number69]

I'm not familiar with Avasts default settings for definition update checks and downloads...so it's hard to compare without knowing those.

But to be honest with you, I"ll take 5 thousand users who have sound 'n NIC drivers 'n Adobe software problems, over 50 users spread across 5 states with windows sytems that fail to boot up.

I think by default Avast checks every 4 hours for definition updates. You can force it to look for updates whenever you want though by clicking the updating tab.

Whenever a person says right off the bat that Eset never had this problem(flagging some programs and some system files), Avira never had this problem, etc...it just shows their lack of experience and their credibility goes into the shitter for me as does their opinion on the subject from that point on.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

I'm not sure I would...
Windows can easily be repaired- your data cannot.
Sooooooooooooooo


And those 50 users would take less time to fix than the 5,000 software problems IMO.


To each his own but 50 workstations needing a DLL replaced is a ton easier to fix than 5,000 machines needing multiple files replaced each.

I'm talking from our perspective of business networks..thus data on tape backup and kept on a server. I'd have to tend to the OS repairs myself..having to travel onsite, I could restore users data remotely from the server. And prep an installer for some office staff joe schmoe to walk around and reinstall those NIC and sound card drivers and Adobe programs.

Thus my "I'd rather have" still stands.

Has gotten way off topic anyways..repair methods aren't the topic. We just had to jump in and make a correction about your claim that other AV brands didn't have FPs like this...those of use who have been down the road (I'm talking of thousands of Eset installs)..yes they have had some.

 

[TechieSooner]

And prep an installer for some office staff joe schmoe to walk around and reinstall those NIC and sound card drivers and Adobe programs.

I could create a pretty basic script that replaced the flagged DLL alot easier than yours

LOL, Again I'd rather take the 50 corrupted DLLs than thousands of corrupted files of all different kinds.

We just had to jump in and make a correction about your claim that other AV brands didn't have FPs like this...those of use who have been down the road (I'm talking of thousands of Eset installs)..yes they have had some.

Like I've said many times, yes they all have FPs.
But they not all have huge FP issues like Avast and AVG have had.



At whatever rate- Eset is the only company to consistently score high on AVComparitives (In the "Big3" tests, it's the only one to hit Advanced+ on everything) in just about all categories. Eset FTW. (MSE and Avira a good second). Outside of those three AVs, I wouldn't use them.

Obviously the OP loved Avast, but 53% detection rate, AVG had something like 49% (IIRC). Avira had 74%. I mean, Avast doesn't look pretty. They fall more into AVG's camp than Avira's, especially now.

 

[number69]

MSE 56%, Advanced +
Avast 53% Advanced +
Eset 60% Advanced +

Stunning differences.

Anyway we're off topic. The thread started out as a bit of news where I slammed Avast(because I love them so much) and got turned into a commerical for Eset.


See the second paragraph of my post before this one for any future thoughts I might have.

 

[gimp]

[troll]

just gotta say.... the way the original OP is worded, is what brought all this on.

a simple "Hey, Avast made a mistake, this is what happend" would have worked.

this quote is what started the "flame war"

By the way, I don't give a shit if you use MSE or Avira(which has always had consistent false positives).

[/troll]

 

[number69]

[troll]

just gotta say.... the way the original OP is worded, is what brought all this on.

a simple "Hey, Avast made a mistake, this is what happend" would have worked.

this quote is what started the "flame war"



[/troll]

Nice try but no dice.

It may have annoyed the people who wanted to use my thread and subject as a opportunity to plug their favorite AV and rip apart another AV under the guise of a "healthy forum debate".

I posted that so we would not get into exactly what some people got into.... this blows that blows, this AV FTW, etc...but that is something I guess I was nieve in thinking would not happen. People have their right to express their views and opinions but it got silly and off topic.