Hi do you still use EasyBCD? I have downloaded from the homepage and from site like majorgeeks ,but the files size doesn't match from the site neosmart fot net , i guess it's their homepage the hash is SHA-256: 34FC8652E14714536B73479AD2F8277A79051D423F1EFBAC9C7CBC9BFE526722 while from others like majorgeek or softpedia is SHA-256: 0A94A43AF2DB7BDBADA87B34BF03D3B221110D1CA21BBEBEC55B08767C1281CC and the file size is homepage 2,18 MB (2.289.864 byte) other sites 2,17 MB (2.282.112 byte) thanks
hi i have downloaded from the homepage , is neosmart dot net ? just because it could be malware , i mean the version i have downloaded from and installed thanks
Both files legit, left is the latest one though. I really wonder why you struggle so much with these little things... Again, remember, digital signature is the most important sec trait to check upon. It's logical software developers or companies release different installers with little different builds.
@Mr.X hi i haven't the openhashtab windows should i be cool , i can see even the total commander icon whee can i get it? and is more safe the digital signature or the hash? thanks Mr.X
OpenHashTab • Hashes are used to verify the integrity only and must be published by and on the original developer's website ideally, not always happen though. • Digital signatures are used to verify integrity and authenticity. This is much secure because the file can be hosted anywhere and anyone can download to verify its authenticity and integrity. Digital Signature is stuck to the file itself and need no reference to a hash value at the original website. Now you tell me which one is more secure.
hi @Mr.X i guess digital signature , but a friend of mine told me the digital signature could be hacker but i would say digtal signature but the files hosted majorgeek or softpedia have different hashes and file size , did you check them thanks Mr.X
Afaik it's quite hard to tamper a signed installer and if hackers wanted to do it, they would target software of widespread use just like CCleaner's case. Geez, obviously you didn't watch carefully my previous reply with images. Read the numbers, values, dates, names, etc. I don't know what else to do it easier for you. Go to the post and study the screenshots then you come back and tell me.
I downloaded both installers and scanned them a VirusTotal. They both had the same result of VirusTotal, with VirIT wrongly detecting it as Trojan.Win32.MSIL_Heur.A and every other scanner saying it is clean. It's a very obvious case of a false positive and either download will be safe to use, which I know has already been stated. In my case, and I'm constantly downloading installers, I've never ever checked the hash of anything I've downloaded. If you download files from the publishers site, or trusted download sites, it will be exceptionally rare to encounter malware. Sure, it is possible, but I don't believe it is enough of a risk to be too worried about.
@Mr.X Hi I have read carefull , and yes I got it sorry english is not my native language thanks @roger_m hi once my computer was infected by a trojan ,even i have run the installation program inside sandboxie , was xp era ,and it 's bible 4 (or bibble 4 , a french program) now it's called aftershot pro i have downloaded it from softpedia after i got burned , i have avoid to download program from host sites tha's all thanks
