Conrad Sallian's community posts

Hello Max,

Just as I was writing this answer Microsoft informed us that they removed the detection and that one should update their definition files.

I perfectly understand what you say and agree completely. Unfortunately, there is little we can do because the antivirus software industry is in dismal state. How else can we characterize them if they cannot even distinguish a digitally signed file from an unsigned trojan-loaded one?

Just think about it - a file signed with an EV Code Signing Certificate coming from a legit developer gets detected as a trojan :) Well, of course not all a/v software is that bad though, but some are.

And there is this VirusTotal, which is another sad story. For almost three years we have been trying to convince them that not all antivirus software are created equal and that they should take a closer look at the quality of the a/v engines they use. Yet, they keep presenting their scan results alphabetically and in red type (even the relatively benign detections). So the never-responding-to-false-positive-requests Chinese antivirus by the name "AntiyAVL" (without VirusTotal you wouldn't even know that it exists) always gets at the top of the list with their bold red warning that Remote Utilities is unsafe :)

Hello Ray,

Yes, we know about the problem and have already informed Microsoft about it. Here is a related forum thread .

P.S. Please, post your messages in related threads only. This thread is dedicated to BitDefender detection, not Microsoft's Windows Defender detection.

Thanks.

Hi Antonio,

We have just sent a false positive report to Microsoft. Usually, they provide a fix very quick, within a day or two (by updating their signature database).

Thanks.

Hello,

Thank you for your message.

I tried the recovery but I don't get the license

You tried the recover key form and didn't receive an email, correct?

Anyway, please send us a message at [email protected] and we will look up your license key and send it to you via email.

Thanks.

Hello Vladimir,

Thank you for your message.  Please, check if you have "Use Ipv6" enabled and let us know.

Alternatively, just delete this registry entry

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Usoris\Remote Utilities Host

and restart the Host with default settings (i.e do not change the port). Then check if it works.

Hello Brian and Ron,

We have contacted IObit, the developer of Advanced System Care. This is what they say:

We downloaded your latest version to have a test and there is no such detection.

So please ask your user to provide more detaills like the program name and version of IObit product and the version of your software.

If possible, please ask your user to scan again and save the full log and send it to us.

You can send the log either directly to them or to us at [email protected] and I will forward it to IObit.

Thank you.

Hello Tom,

The connections_4.xml file is the file where your general address book is stored. However, all entries must be shown not just some of them.

Either the file was corrupted somehow or it was one known bug with the 6.8 address book that has been fixed in the current version 6.9.

Anyway, I'm glad that you figured out and fixed the issue.

Thanks.

Petar Georgiev wrote:

Well, i can assure you there wasn't beta 2 either in the download section or blog.

See >  https://www.remoteutilities.com/about/blog/

Yes, both viewer and host are updated to .4

After we rolled out the final release we quite updated the headings of the blog posts so that they read version 6.9 instead of beta 2.

See our twitter messages of 24 September https://twitter.com/remoteutilities . There are still mentions of beta 2.

Hello Geert,

Thank you for your post. We will check it out, thank you!

Hello Petar,

Well i waited patiently for beta 2, for some reason it didn't came out.

Why, it came out. Beta 2 has been around for almost a month.

Now we have official 6.9.4 and sound capture still doesn't work. Shame on you.

Have you updated both Viewer and Host?