Conrad Sallian's community posts

Hello,

Regardless of the terminology and intentions, we need a solution please.

I understand. But what kind of solution can we provide? As I mentioned, this 6.8.0.1 installer has been around for almost a year and clear of all a/v detections except just a couple of benign "riskware" classifications. There are hundreds of thousands of users who downloaded and use this very build. Also neither Symantec nor McAfee and TrendMicro treated this file as dangerous.  

For some reason, similar [competitors] software isn't stopped by BD. We just tried 4 different ones on our machines. All good. There must be something not right within the code of RU what triggers alarm.

The code didn't change, it's the same code as it has been since August 2017.

We are in constant contact with major antivirus software vendors (e.g. Kaspersky, Webroot etc.) and all of them are very helpful and responsive when it comes to fixing the detection issues. However, some antivirus vendors are not as good in this respect. Still, we will try contacting them today and figure out the issue. In fact, we will be asking them to treat their own customers better and not to block legitimate software on their computers, however strange that may sound. Well, if they cannot take care about their own customers (who paid them money for their "antivirus solution"), we will.

Hello,

Gen:Trojan.Heur.DP.ZT0@aqKIFxni
Infected

Note the "heur" part that means "heuristic". The file is new, the antivirus program just doesn't know about it yet and classifies it as malware using heuristics algorithms.  This is true about all other links that you provided below - take a closer look at detection names. Most of them either say "heuristic" or "riskware" (potentially unwanted program/application, PUA).

Besides, for any new release antivirus programs start to immediately classify the software as riskware or even malware. This time there are very few actually. It used to be much worse with previous releases where we could easily get 20+ false positive detections on new build.

This is how antivirus software works these days - they prefer to be on the safe side and block just everything that might be dangerous (remote software is usually in this category). It usually takes a couple of weeks of sending false positive requests before the detections are removed.

westmindltd wrote:

Hi Conrad

And the funny part is that the Home [free] edition of BD ignores RU installer and the software itself.

Hello,

Thanks for the details. Yes, apparently there is some inconsistency about this detection. Even more unusual is the fact that this version has been around for almost a year now (the last 6.8.0.1 build was released in August 2017) and only now BitDefender decided, all of a sudden, that it's "malware".

Remote Utilities beta 6.9 has been released today, by the way:
https://www.remoteutilities.com/download/beta.php

Hello Artur,

Thank you for your message.

Already reported to Bitdefender as a False Positive but it didn't help.

Do you mean you reported to BitDefender that they blocked legitimate software on your computers and they refused to help? That is, they can simply "think" that you shouldn't use certain legitimate software because they say so.

Unfortunately, I don't know how we can help in this situation. How can an antivirus software vendor that cannot distinguish between good and bad software even be trusted? What if they are similarly incapable of detecting real malware when time comes and thus jeopardize security of your systems?

Hello Chas,

The idea being for me to see who logs in and does what. Without their ID / IP I have no idea.

I understand. In the future we are going to do the following:

- Make the ID server to transfer the IP address of the Viewer to the Host log. Now you cannot see the Viewer IP address because it stays on the server side and is effectively hidden from the Host.

- Implement a full-fledged reporting/auditing system that would allow the admin to check who accessed what and in which connection mode.

Thanks.

Hello Ralph,

Thank you for the update. It looks like your Host service won't start after the reboot. Please, check out this knowledge base article and see if solutions listed there help https://www.remoteutilities.com/support/kb/host-service-won-t-start/

Hello Ralph,

Thank you for the post.

Server is set to auto start.

By the server do you mean Host, correct? Technically speaking it's the server, yes, as in "client-server" architecture. But to distinguish it from RU Server we call the remote module Host.

When using Power Control to reboot the host computer into safe mode, I am then unable to connect back to it with the viewer. Is this a possible action? I remember from years ago being able to do this with VNC.

You enabled the "Reboot in safe mode" checkbox , correct?

Hi Chas,

Thank you for your post.

That depends on what connection type you use - Internet-ID or direct connection - and also whether Viewer and Host share the same network (and subnet) or located in different networks.

Hello Eric,

Thank you for your message.

The ability to bulk-import IP addresses and ranges will appear in the upcoming version 6.9. The Host settings will be XML-based which will allow you to actually import your own data, e.g. list of IP addresses to block.

Hope that helps.

Hello Eli,

This suggestion will be added to our wish list. Thanks!