Thoughts about PrevX

I completely disagree with this statement.
FPs are concern only for newbies?
NO. It's concern for everybody.

Why? Because it's waste of the time. It's not my job to upload each single FP (And as I already have posted, in my experience it was more then expected in clean experimental system) to be verified.
It's the job of the developers to maintain strong database and less FPs.

And I am sure, even you scan it with additional scanners or upload online before using if PrevX detects something, which you are sure safe.
So, again waste of the time.
But I will not go into more details, as I have already posted a lot about it in this thread.

In conclusion, FPs are concern for both beginner and advanced users.

 

where are all these FP's?

keygens cracks etc?

ive only ever had a couple true FP's in a few years of service.

 

I agree if you get FPs. There are many here who don't, and then there are users such as yourself who do. So the question is: why is this? Once you begin to answer that, the picture might become clearer and solutions found to eliminate such FPs.

 

No, I usually see them on newer programs, or programs updates. Since they added Safeonline, I have also seen a lot of FPs for websites.

 

ok, but it depends what settings you have the heuristics at?

ie. If you have the program age/popularity settings high or above, you still see these types of detections.

 

One year of use with Prevx and I have had one FP. My settings are Heuristics to high and Program age and popularity to medium. As with any program everyone can have a different experience. Of course the mighty Online Armor and its HIPS are also a BIG helper too...

 

Have you bothered to report them on the Prevx forum ?
I have been using Prevx since before V3 was released to Beta testing and have only seen a couple of FP which were all for new/updated programs and one phishing FP when SafeOnline was released. Many of the FP people were reporting have been caused by having the Heuristic Settings maxed out, in that case Prevx acts like an Anti-Executable.

 

I have the settings on default, which I believe are low/medium.

 

I mark the files that are FPs, but not the websites.

 

.
I agree up to a point. Whenever your security software throws up a flag you have cause for concern. Regardless of the product there is always the possibility of a false positive and at first you don't know. A less experienced user always has the dilemma of not knowing what to do because they are dependent on the software. A more experienced user knows he can get a second opinion by running another scanner or uploading the file, etc. Because malware are constantly being produced and mutating you can only go so far with databases. The cutting edge is behavior analysis and other techniques that make educated guesses without the benefit of signatures. Developers are always walking the razor's edge between FPs and lettings things slip through. How many times have we seen badly infected machines that also have fully updated AVs/Suites that sit there brain-dead, not noticing the malware activity? If you have to err a little to one side or the other, wouldn't you prefer a few FPs? I would...

 

I've not found there to be an excessive number of FPs but there are a couple of irritating ones.I use Vista Codec Pack,which is updated regularly and every time it gets flagged up by PrevX.After reporting the FP on about a dozen occasions and having it rectified,only to see it re-appear with the next release I gave up bothering and just ignore the thing now.

 

The only FP's I have seen from Prevx my self are program cracks. I use alot of programs on a daily basis that I own that require a damn CD. I wont carry a giant case of CD's with me so any program that I OWN that requires a CD gets cracked immediately. Prevx normaly flags everyone of those. I just report them to Joe and leave it at that.

 

thats weird,

i use no-cd cracks for my pc games all the time, just because its a pain in the cd all the time, and never (not even once) have they gave me an alert from Prevx.

 

Very little (actually none) false positives in here...

 

I've also experienced very little false positives.

 

You know, I already answered this question on first pages and I am not going to repeat it again as it will be pain for me to write and for others to read again.
Picture is already clear, and I already explained it.

Everywhere...
For example system files...

For exemple on free version with all default settings

I would choose prevention and for detection low False Positives.

 

You should still report those if you believe them to be FPs. Otherwise, they can't be corrected if they are indeed FPs, and no-one benefits.