F-Prot resurrected

the new version 6.9.0.2 will be relased on 11th August let us expecting!

The release is scheduled tomorrow, on August 11th.

Usersthat have the Internet Update version will receive this updateautomatically. Although the updated file system protection driverrequires restarting the computer on Windows 2000 and XP, the olderdriver will still function properly until restart. Vista and upwards donot need a restart, but Windows Installer may ask you to if youdownload the MSP below and update manually.

To those who would like to obtain version 6.0.9.2 right away, you can download them from the below links.

PLEASENOTE: The packages below are currently going through the final tests,so these should be regarded as Release Candidates until announcedotherwise after the release is made.

Full install is required when doing a fresh install:
32-bit - fpav-windows-x86-hc-en-6.0.9.2.msi (MD5: 1611afab0632f4022e618b0dd5bfc69f)
64-bit - fpav-windows-x64-hc-en-6.0.9.2.msi (MD5: 112cbf0237ef1d650e5b1987323c2fe4)


Patch from 6.0.9.x to 6.0.9.2 (MSP file) is required if FPAV 6.0.9.1 is already installed:
32-bit - fpav-windows-x86-hc-en-6.0.9.2.msp (MD5: 0bec985142d4f89345ece3dc258ea5ae)
64-bit - fpav-windows-x64-hc-en-6.0.9.2.msp (MD5: 3b8f7c3e144458637dbfa7d370d8372b)

Please report problems or errors by submitting a ticket through http://support.f-prot.com, via e-mail to support (at) f-prot (dot) com or here on the forum.

 

change logs?
I tryed f-prot last version and the realtime guard stopped working alot. this is the first new build since then.

 

Great news since I was planning to test F-Prot this coming week-end. It is quite a coincidence, now I will be testing the new version . Do you know what's new?

 

It's been 15 months since the last release and from what I can see it is mainly a bug fix and an engine upgrade to 4.5.0; so no major changes/improvements.

Progress is very slow at Frisk and it takes ages nowadays even to fix minor bugs; but at least it looks like they will have a version compatible with Windows 7, when this OS is officially released.

Normally, it will probably be awhile for the change logs to appear on the main site

 

The good thing about F-prot is still the 29$/5 computers deal.

 

It used to be a very slim AV with pretty decent detection. It also had the great feature of having ftp/http available definitions. This way you could update it yourself. The newer versions now have dropped that feature and they have been quite bloated compared to thier predecessors. I stopped using it when thier new versions came out. I think 3x was the old one before the newer one. I tried it, and honestly thought it was a huge disappointment. How are thier detection rates these days?

Sul.

 

I don't think AV Comparatives tested F Prot. I seem to remember some disagreement in the past, and prior to stopping including F Prot the detection rates were among the lowest.

Hopefully this has changed, but for me, I would not consider it until I saw a test from AVC.

Regards,
Jerry

 

If you ignore ShadowServer, past and recent results generally place it mid- table for detection.

For example see recent test at Virus bulletin.

 

Just for info: Returnil has partnered with Frisk for the Virus Guard component of the forthcoming new RVS 2010.

Good decision?

philby

 

Security vendors who have no malware scanner in their product do not always pick the best AV for integration; the bean counters in the company make sure of that

So Frisk may simply be offering the best license terms to Returnil.

 

Good decision? I am pretty sure if you are a bean counter for Returnil. Why does it need a AV anyway.

 

My thought exactly.

 

I don't understand why an av guard would be needed in the program either.

 

I don't think an AV in Returnil is a terrible idea - think about it. Returnil is only good once you reboot and it reverts changes back to a previous state. Well what if you get a virus in the current session before reboot - say a keylogger and it just starts logging your data before you reboot - returnil isnt going to help you there because when you reboot even though the keylogger is gone it's already done it's job in the current session. Also, there are indeed viruses and malware that escape a reboot with returnil - so perhaps this is an extra layer of protection?

 

Speaking for FRISK, I agree that updates have been much too uncommon in the past two years. We're ready to push out new releases more frequently from now on.

 

I hope they are not relying on simple signatures for protection against that...

 

Just minor changes done ... no resurrection.

http://www.f-prot.com/news/gen_news/090811_release_win6092.html

 

Even though they are updating it, i consider F-Prot to be a dead project really.
They are not mentioned around, i don't hear any good successes in detections of spreading malware, nothing. Also ever since Michael left them, they seem to be stagnating again, just updating the tech developed at that time.

 

that's your opinion, I still respect what they do, no it may not be up to what other user desire in so called 'in the cloud' technology but what they do the best they can & don't BS you with tech terms. I sometimes just like an AV that is based on signatures...the others seem to have a lot of false positive, that's worse IMHO...

 

Hi,
Don't mean to interrupt the flow, but thought I would provide some answers for the RVS 2010 specific commentary:

@philby, The Tester, and trjam:

Kevin523 summed up an important part of why an AM component was added. ISR on its own can only do three things:

1. Drop all changes
2. Save some changes
3. Save all changes

This leaves a gap that must be closed. It also provides an excellent means for closing the other potential gap where ISR circumventing malware is concerned. The most important considerations from our perspective are time to removal and performance rather than specific detection as we know that anything other than those specifically targeted families of anti-ISR malware will be gone with a restart of the computer.

The criteria here is not if the AM detects all malware, it is only critical that it be able to reliably detect SPECIFIC types of malware...

Hi Martijn2,
No, signatures are not the end of the Virus Guard. Frisk is only a part of what we are doing on the AM front. The most recent RVS 2010 Betas include targeted AE functionality and behavioral/sample data collection (optional). Further, we will be expanding later 3x and 4x generation versions with new capabilities we are already developing.

But keep in mind what I sad above. It is more important to be able to focus on the actual threats rather than trying to detect everything. Security is about reducing risk. To RVS, the greatest risk comes from anything designed to circumvent the virtualization feature and for this, Frisk offers very reliable and effective capabilities to the whole.

Mike

 

Thanks Coldmoon for explaining why you are incorporating a Frisk antivirus component.
That makes sense.