Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Lundholm, Nov 1, 2007.
it's not closed...yet
afraid of the 'Trojan-Spy.Win32.Avira.avr'? take it easy mate
Lundholm, if you could link to this thread to your thread there, they can see my screenshots of AntiVir uploading data to the i'net. Just a thought though. Their denial has got me curious to say the least.
Thanks a lot for your input, but I'm afraid I don't see the link.
Maybe I need new glasses?
Sorry, I misunderstood your reference!
What's required here, is data from the very first update after the install. That would require a clean re-install, and I can't be bothered to do that. I just hoped that somebody else would have noticed the same thing, or that Avira would explain - in reassuring terms - what's going on. Anyway, the harm is done ,if any!
I was reading the thread, and their denial, so I thought the link would at least show them that there is an upload. Nothing will get answered if they say nothing happened. Funny how the mod explained what was contained in the upload and then the fanboy denies any upload at all. Sort of like "suppressing a confession"...
As you know, product forums are mostly populated by supporters and deniers. I didn't expect any confessions - that would have been world history - but maybe a good explanation, and the mod explanation is not good.
Agreed. The mod stated that the upload of notifier and the virus defs on a new install were over 1 MB, but my screenie shows that with a month-old installation, the upload of the same were mere kilobytes. Or maybe there was more interesting stuff on your pc to upload than on mine. I guess your porno-collection is bigger than mine... lol just kidding. Or am I
i just updated and it was only 60k transmitted. so i dont know..
We'd actually have to do a clean-install and monitor that initial-update to get a good comparison. I'll try again when a new version comes out..
im thinking of switching out anyway, ive had so many failed updates and mailgaurd has not turned on now more than a few times... im getting annoyed i really like avira but it seems to have some quirks i may switch back to ess for the time being we'll see. its just avira is soooooo fast and smooth while running
I resent being referred to as a "fanboy" - check my posts on the Avira forum & you will see that I can complain with the best of them when there is a real issue - in this case there is no real issue
Actually, I never denied there was an upload - of course there has to be one to determine which VDF version is installed, and if it needs updating - Radu already explained that on the AntiVir Forum.
What I denied was that there was +1Mb upload. Lundholm determined this from a non existant "upload byte count", as he called it, on the update window. I simply wanted to explain that he is misinterpreting the data somehow - still waiting for a response to my last post there.
To be honest, this whole thread is just FUD- does anyone actually believe that Avira is out to steal your data?
Oh - perhaps they're out to steal Lundholm's data only
Not Avira, but sometimes you have rogue programmers. We have not received a clear answer if it should be 1 mb and if it is, why. We're not even sure if 1 mb was sent.
When we buy a software product, we trust the supplier of the product to give us a "clean" product.
I worked at a financial institution. We had a separate QA group and they did a pretty decent job. We were supposed to have code reviews. But realistically, when you have a dozen of programmers coding hundreds of modules, the changes would be added to version control without code review. The coder would write the release and test notes, QA would build the QA version from version control source and then test it.
The weakness is when one coder becomes very familiar with part of the system and he becomes the one and only coder who maintains that section. After one coder left, we found he put code in to access to costumers restricted account functions without using the customers password. We did not find fraud and we realized that he used it as a debugging tool to research production issues.
That was 12 years ago.
Remember that there no real evidence in this case, only misinterpretation of data, as far as the OP has posted. If Lundholm could supply some logs/screenshots etc of this happening then we could consider your proposal as an unlikely possibility. I still think it's FUD, especially considering the lack of any supporting evidence.
Thats why I wrote we're not even sure if 1 mb was sent.
Trying to be quite and nice but this is ridiculous. What do you assume they are doing, stealing your birth records, cameras in the bedroom? Avira has only one frigging concern and that is to provide you security, not make you feel so damn insecure. It never ceases to amaze me how stuff gets stirred up here and yours truly is the worlds worst. Back to my hobbit.
I agreed with that...
In the thread in question you stated "Of course everyone denies it, because it doesn't happen - there is no privacy issue." There is no mention of the size there.
I would have to see what Lundholm's data contains to answer that question lol
The FUD idea is possible. Lundholm may just be having fun at our expense...
Absolutely agree with all of the above.
It used to bother me when I would install (from a fresh box) NAV and the first thing happening online would be a download/install of six months worth of signature/program updates. My last purchase from Norton/Symantec (two years ago) was downloaded fresh from their Online Store (thinking that it would be up-to-date) and it still needed a huge update.
How long would you need to be online with an outdated AntiVirus for a possible infection?
The way I installed AntiVir was to download the fresh version of the Program and then also download the current Manual Update 'fusebundle'.
During the install (off-line), I would deny the 'Update offer' and following reboot, run that downloaded Manual Update.
Now when connecting online, protection would already be as current as possible and first Online Update would be very small.
The Manual Update 'fusebundle' is always huge (15MB) as it must contain all of the million plus signatures and current Hueristic Search Engine, the Online Updates average less than 100KB as they only include what you don't already have.
It would always be necessary for an 'incremental' updater to be able to see what you already have installed in your system and I would never consider this 'look' to be a privacy issue.
Online updater also looks at your AntiVir installation for needed Program Updates (which are not included with Manual Update downloads).
If you were paranoid about your AntiVir, you could stick with Manual Updates and never see any 'up-load' (or Program Updates) at all.
About 3 months ago when Avira had started uploading the new version, there was a stretch of almost a week where I couldn't get any updates because of server-over-load. Not knowing how to do the manual update, I ended up uninstalling. I didn't realize it was that easy to do, thanks for that. *****
I didn't say it was Avira. Of course, Avira's concern is to provide security while making a profit. But there rogue or disenchanted programmers, who can ruin any product. It is an industry wide issue. Its naive to think otherwise.
Its up to companies to set their internal controls so this is minimized.
No problem berng. My comments as of today will only deal with Avira. In all honesty they are working to continue to produce the best suite on the market. They have no intentions of stopping until they reach that goal. Their product support is continuing to grow, and learn from its customers. Avira knows that you cannot put a product and/or changes out to their customers until it is ready and stable. They are doing it right. No hidden agendas on their part, that I can assure you. So feel free to ask, as that is what my, sole intention of being here will be about.
To my knowledge, the only thing that is UPLOADED during updates is a random generated serial (you have to allow that during install, it is to find out how many people are doing updates) and the OS type/version so we see which OS is most common with our customers. This data is like 20 bytes - no way 1 MB is uploaded. I will have this checked.
I think we are mixing words here. The 'upload' is not a real upload but just outgoing traffic. Note that AntiVir does not upload anything in the common sense of 'upload' (means: sending a file to a server).
The outgoing traffic can be easily explained by our Updater System. Our update system is running plain http. This means sending the GET requests and the ACK packets causes that traffic. This is normal and actually the same when using a browser. If a lot of files must be updates (depends on how old your initial installation is), there might be up to 150 requests ore more. Additional traffic is caused by TCP/IP itself.
<edited and added signature>
Avira GmbH, Germany
This makes a lot of sense to me. In a normal update, the outgoing traffic is about 3% of the incoming, according to my firewall, which is fine. But this was apparently not the case for the first update, where the outgoing traffic was comparable to the incoming, if I'm correct. As stated on the Avira forum, the update was 10 files and 2.7Mb. This does not create a lot of outgoing traffic.
Do you happen to have any screen shots of the install update window?
No big uploads on both my systems running Avira paid.
Separate names with a comma.