v4 better in removal media virus?

today my friend pc was infected by a virus(Win32.AutoIt)
he has install v3 fully update[noparse](370[/noparse] but the virus was not detected
so i install v4 and fully update it but v4 did not do the job so i install norton 2009 and it's detect the virus(w32.sillyFDC)
i have sent the virus to eset lab but no response
i sent the file ria_sen.zip to virustotal 17 antivirus detect it
pls make v4 better for usb viruses

 

They are already working in that way . v4 introduces new way of using Adv.Heur. with additional options for removable media.

As you know - missing threats is pretty normal for any AV vendor nowadays . One will detect it , another will miss it . More important is to miss less and catch more , which ESET already does well.

 

i am also a fan of eset antvirus but advanced heuristics on removal media does not even detect it
this virus is very dangerous eset have to detect it i have sent sample to eset lab

 

I didn't say you aren't .

Using AH for PE files coming from removable media is generally considered something that will enable better detection of threat spreading via removable media . However , this doesn't mean 100% malware detection .

According to Symantec's website this threat is used to download another malware - have you checked if the actual payload detected by ESET ?

 

Please PM me details about the email you sent to samples[at]eset.com. I couldn't find any with "sillyFDC" in the subject. What's more, the names you provided seem to be a very generic and cover too many different malware.

 

pm sent

 

It's a compiled Autoit script, detected with the latest version 3710.

 

Is it just in v4 or you have somehow made a mistake in the name ?
Why such name - AutoRun.Autoit ? Isn't this a duplication in the name ?

 

Sorry, I don't understand. Autorun is the variant name while Autoit is the family name. What's not clear about that?