AVERT v2.3 - News Update and Open for Suggestions

Hey everyone,

It's been awhile since I've worked on AVERT and I thought to give you all an update on what's going to happen in the next couple of months. So, here's a quick list of the features I'm going to work on. Please take a look at the site for additional information and follow the blog link for in depth details.

• ACleaner - In my attempt to reduce my dependency on third party software, I'm creating my own temp file cleaner, similar to CCleaner. There's more info about this on the blog as well as a photo album for v2.3 so far.

• Reducing the amount of scanners to increase quality and hopefully getting cooperation from more vendors.

• AvertPE - A lot of people have been requesting a pre-installation environment and out of all the things I'll be working on, this will be my main priority after finishing ACleaner.

• False Positives - I'll be working on creating a method to quarantine files.

• Free/Paid - Currently, there's a free and paid version of AVERT. I've been able to recoup my costs from developing and hosting AVERT, and I'll be making every version from now on free.

Please let me know what you guys think and if you all have any questions.

Thanks

Quick screenshot of ACleaner
http://goo.gl/AOqGl

 

ACleaner name is already used: http://www.cleanersoft.com/cleaner/privacy_registry_cleaner.htm

I'm very interested in AvertPE. Which version of WinPE will it be based on? Hopefully 2 or above, because 1 cannot detect my RAID.

Great news that you've made it freeware due to sufficient payment.

 

Please don't make replies like this. I'm fairly certain you've made a post like this before.

I'm already aware and you're not helping.

It will be made on the 3.0 WAIK. There's more info about it on the blog.

 

Do you want your software to be confused for something else that has a different reputation?

Great news then.

 

Yeah it's not helping. Every developer is fully aware of the name of software they make. The post was made to let people know about features of an upcoming new release. Not about the name of software. If there are any issues, then I'll deal with them. Either way, they're not your concern.

If you actually wanted to be helpful, then stop talking about the name of the software and focus more on what it actually does.

 

weirddemon, Hello
I can appreciate what goes into making
a program like yours and thank you!

one questions for you...
One..Tell me why I should dump CCleaner and go for yours?
On your website its says download free or purchase full after reading your post it sounds like full is free
correct me if I am wrong and again thank you
Gordon

 

I read in the blog that the software will be completely free..

 

That is what I also thought

 

From the blog

So V2.3 is free

 

Right. v2.3 will be completely free. v2.2 currently has a paid and free version. v2.3 hasn't been released and is still a few months away.

Err... well, I never said you should dump CCleaner. I'm making a temp file cleaner, because with AVERT, I want to rely less on third party software as much as possible. So if you run AVERT, with v2.3, my app will be used instead of CCleaner.

But, my app will have some features that CCleaner doesn't currently have. So just wait and see

 

Ok cool I am a patient dude
have agreat night

 

I don't understand the agitation you displayed towards J_L when he pointed out that the name ACleaner is already in use. It was obvious, at least to me, that he was only trying to help. Your reaction was a bit bizarre to say the least.

Later...

 

Because you don't have the entire context and you're not seeing it from my point of view. When I first made this post, the only thing he wrote was the the first line. Nothing else. It wasn't until later that he edited his post to include additional information.

I've spent literally hundreds of hours working with this software. I've done everything from researching tons of different vendors and technologies, to coding and designing, adding features, helping people with issues, testing and bug fixing and many more things. I did all of this and continue to do all of this to bring a tool to the community they can use and benefit from.

So after all that, I make a new post telling everyone about all of these great features that they've been requesting and I've finally decided to spend the necessary amount of time to implement them. These features, by the way, will be no easy feat. They'll take a lot more time to implement, which is why I've put them off for so long.

And then, the only response a get is a one liner explaining that the name I've chosen for a sub app I'm making, is already taken. There's no appreciation, no suggestions, nothing. Just one guy going out of his way to Google the name I've chosen and paste back what he's seen.

So of course I'm going to be agitated.

 

Then we will have to wait and see how good v2.3 does vs Ccleaner. Why not give v2.2 free if the v2.3 will be free.

 

ACleaner is free and even opensource. So if you can try it out anytime, though it isn't completed yet. Though you'd have to compile it. Either way, you see it here for the time being. When completed, I'll move it to Google Code.

v2.2 has a free and paid version. Although v2.3 will be free completely, it wouldn't be fair to those who paid for v2.2, for me to just to make it completely free now.

 

I have just installed AVERT, and I have a couple of suggestions.

- Include and option to automatically scan with VirusTotal all the files detected (suspicious, infected...) by the different AV's

- An installable version

- Also would be nice to see engines like superantispyware, or Malwarebytes Anti-Malware since they focus in detect files that the AV's doesn't.
So maybe a combo of 2 AV with mbam is more effective than 4 AV's.

- I guess that you dont have the same resources than ( http://bugbopper.com/BugBopper/Default.asp ) but would be nice to have some kind of automatic local whitelist to speed up the scanns.

For example (a way to do it without resources) if the same file has been scanned by any config and it's more than 6 months old or 1 year old, and has been find undetected by 2 or more scanners the file will be added to the whitelist so the next time you use the scanners this file will be skipped. This can be optional and configurable.

 

guest,

Thanks for the suggestions.

I had already planned on including this in AVERT just as you've mentioned. I received permission from VirusTotal to do so, a few months ago.

I need to really include SAS and MBAM in my FAQ list. I know full well how great both of those applications are and I'm in the process of trying to work out a license agreement with them. As free apps, I can't utilize them. They're specifically made so they can't be automated unless you pay for the commercial version.

A whitelist is a great idea. I had thought about making one for v2.3 a long time ago, but it totally slipped my mind. Thanks for bringing it up again. It shouldn't be too hard to implement since most scanners allow you to exclude specific files.

Making a whitelist as you're suggesting might not be possible in the beginning, but one that could be added to by the user would be fine. I guess I could compile a list of sorts, upload it to the server and download it as it's updated.

Thanks again for the suggestions.

 

One more thing I have seen that the AV's are being installed at:
C:\Users\XXX\AppData\Local\AVERT
Would be nice to have them in a subfolder of AVERT exe file them would be easiest to "uninstall" it

Is possible to make a installable version?

Would be nice to see an improvement in the interface specially during the scanning process.

Also I would like to see more details in the configuration of the engines I guess that the different categories that you have stablish will not do exacty the same for all the scanners.
If I select minimal I dont know exactly what is being scanned.

If you can compile a list why can't we? there is no way to at least exclude the files not detected the last 2 or 3 times in a period? then we can report this list to you and you can improve the main whitelist.
For example:
File asd.exe scanned by 2 or more scanners (excluding virusbuster, spybot, clamwin) and found "clean"
3 weeks later
File asd.exe scanned by 2 or more scanners and found "clean"
5 weeks later
File asd.exe scanned by 2 or more scanners and found "clean"

Since the files has been scanned at least 2 times separated at least 2 months in time will be reported to AVERT as safe, and added to the whitelist.

Then you can add/merge or whatever all this files to a main whitelist that is updated every 2 or 3 days or every week.

 

The apps aren't installed. They're extracted to this temp location and then are deleted after the process has completed. They're kept zipped up in the root path of the AVERT executable, though. I did this because users may burn AVERT to a disk, so then they wouldn't be extractable. That and, while flash drives are getting quicker, unzipping and running them from a flash drive is generally slower than running them from the HDD.

I could create an installed version, but I'm not sure I see a use for it. Could you elaborate?

Oh, yeah. I can do that. I misunderstood what you meant.

 

The installed version would be just for comfort, and all the files including signatures would be keep uncompressed in the root folder in "C:\program files"


I edited the last post and I added this:

- Would be nice to see an improvement in the interface specially during the scanning process.

- Also I would like to see more details in the configuration of the engines I guess that the different categories that you have stablish will not do exacty the same for all the scanners.
If I select minimal I dont know exactly what is being scanned.

 

To make the whitelist maybe you can exclude engines like virusbuster, spybot, clamwin... to take into consideration when they don't detect a file.
At least the file must be scanned by 2 "major" av's for example

By the way I have selected the minimal scann for Panda and it's is scanning my second drive, a minimal scan should scann the critical windows folders and other stuff on C:

Just my advice, is better to have AVERT working perfectly and being able to configure what is going to be scanned with a few av's than have a lot with less support

 

All the AVs do work properly. But regardless, I am slimming down the number of AVs for other reason. The blog will give you more info on this.

 

Yes I read something about cooperation...

And what about to add the settings of the engine and being able to configure what will be scanned. Critical folders, memory, registry...

 

The settings of each scanner are decided based on how I chose to setup the arguments. For the foreseeable future, minimal scans will continue to scan how it is setup now. When I setup minimal, blended, etc, I did so by reducing which arguments should be used. So Panda will continue to scan each drive, but won't scan other items that may take a while.

 

I believe I also mentioned that I was reducing the amount of scanners for quality.

Each option is setup to run specific arguments. I won't implement an option to scan specific directories only, because the amount of work to do so is beyond what I'm willing to put it for a feature that doesn't offer much.

I also won't change the settings to where the user can choose, memory, processes, etc. But, I could be more transparent in what each option does.