Hitman Pro Support and Discussion Thread

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

I second this thought, especially in corporate environment. It would only be a matter of time before end-user encountered a FP and deleted something that shouldn't have been deleted. Quarantine (or a log, at minimum) would be essential in situations like this.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Any updates on Hitman's development?

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

SurfRight just released a new version, 3.5.2 build 76. Here are the release notes:

Build 76 (2009-10-05)

• Version 3.5.2
• Added Winsock repair functionality. When Hitman Pro deleted a malicious Winsock LSP protocol driver it now repairs the LSP chain. With previous versions, this problem resulted in having Internet connection problems.
• Fixed a problem where specifc directories where not scanned due to non-resident $I30 NTFS-indexes (index fragmentation).
• Improved detection of malicious Mozilla Firefox extensions and plugins.
• Improved detection of malware that starts through a scheduled task (Windows Task Scheduler).
• Fixed a problem with the network enumerator (port scan).
• Added Windows 7 taskbar integration. The progress bar is now also displayed in the Taskbar button. This feature works for Windows 7 build 7600 (RTM) or newer only.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Mark,
My test machine is getting the following error after update to build 76. It happens on random files at different points of scan. No logs that I could find, so not sure if I can provide any more information.
http://i36.tinypic.com/2s9cgts.png
This did not happen with build 75 previously.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

working great here, and nice taskbar progress indication

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

My free Hitman Pro still says it's build 74. I've had it automatically update before so don't know why it hasn't yet upgraded to 76. Any suggestions? Should i just uninstall and download the new build and reinstall that one?

Running 64 bit on Vista.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

hitman uses only from scanner prevx
G-data detects
NOD detects
AntiVir detects
a-sqared detects
Prevx not detect
Hitman Pro not detect

virustotal hash 15a488d926a467f83aa1c861035a8601

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Based on one file you make this statement?

I looked into our database and the funny thing is that Prevx says it is white. White always overrules Bad classification. I will contact Prevx about this. Thanks.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Erik, all good things from my end.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Build 74 is the latest for 64-bit.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Ah. Ok. Thanks. That explains it.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

huh........hitman is detecting its own driver as suspicious...

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Please expand the node so we get an explanation why it is suspicious.

Also, the driver is signed so it should not show up in the results as the serial of the certificate is white listed by Hitman Pro.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

woooo this is a very FP

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

well i let hitman delete it.....to see what happens....it deleted it and hitman runs fine afterwards.... so did it delete it really? for deleting the driver should cause it to stall/not run... does hitman have a log or something?

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

did you rebooted?

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Hitman Pro deploys the driver when it starts to scan. When the scan is complete the driver is automatically deleted.
Hitman Pro does not leave its driver running as it is an on-demand scanner.
I just wonder why it was detected as the driver is signed and white listed. Really strange.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Erik, I had the same thing, but only right after I updated from build 75 to 76 (Vista 32-bit). Kasperking might have had the same thing, right after the program updated?

I didn't delete it (mine was in a temporary directory if I recall - I assumed it was part of the update process - one version being removed, new version being installed - build 76 seemed to be a larger update than others), and after another scan, it doesn't appear again. If I see it again, I'll take a screenshot. I right-clicked and reported as a false positive.

Just ran another scan, a few more scans, and all good.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

We've corrected this now and marked it as Bad. Thanks for the report!

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

does'nt that thwart the purpose of having 5 scanners for deeming a file clean based on one scanners classification and overlooking others is well ...uuugh inexplicable.

well it was not an update for sure....it was already 3.5.2 build 76.....I guess it was just an off day....or moment for hitman ..killing itself or trying to....the japanese call it harakiri.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

Erik,
Can you elaborate on this? For example, if infection is detected by 4 scanners out of 5 and that one identifies the file as clean/white, would entire detection be considered clean/white, based on that one "vote"?
Thanks!

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

It is by design that white overrules bad. But the discussion at SurfRight has started again about this decision.

What do you guys think what should be done if one scanner says a file is white and one other says its bad?

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

I think it should be the "majority" rule. Since there are five scanners, if three of them flags a file, it should be considered suspicious.

 

Re: Anyone tried out Hitman Pro?

I definitely think there needs to be a way to handle this differently. If 4 engines detect file as malicious and 1 doesn't, why would you take the least possible result and treat it as the correct one? I'm not sure I understand the logic behind your decision, to be honest.