F-Prot resurrected

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by NobleT, Aug 10, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. NobleT

    NobleT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Posts:
    58
    the new version 6.9.0.2 will be relased on 11th August let us expecting!:D

    The release is scheduled tomorrow, on August 11th.

    Usersthat have the Internet Update version will receive this updateautomatically. Although the updated file system protection driverrequires restarting the computer on Windows 2000 and XP, the olderdriver will still function properly until restart. Vista and upwards donot need a restart, but Windows Installer may ask you to if youdownload the MSP below and update manually.

    To those who would like to obtain version 6.0.9.2 right away, you can download them from the below links.

    PLEASENOTE: The packages below are currently going through the final tests,so these should be regarded as Release Candidates until announcedotherwise after the release is made.

    Full install is required when doing a fresh install:
    32-bit - fpav-windows-x86-hc-en-6.0.9.2.msi (MD5: 1611afab0632f4022e618b0dd5bfc69f)
    64-bit - fpav-windows-x64-hc-en-6.0.9.2.msi (MD5: 112cbf0237ef1d650e5b1987323c2fe4)


    Patch from 6.0.9.x to 6.0.9.2 (MSP file) is required if FPAV 6.0.9.1 is already installed:
    32-bit - fpav-windows-x86-hc-en-6.0.9.2.msp (MD5: 0bec985142d4f89345ece3dc258ea5ae)
    64-bit - fpav-windows-x64-hc-en-6.0.9.2.msp (MD5: 3b8f7c3e144458637dbfa7d370d8372b)

    Please report problems or errors by submitting a ticket through http://support.f-prot.com, via e-mail to support (at) f-prot (dot) com or here on the forum.
     
  2. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    change logs?
    I tryed f-prot last version and the realtime guard stopped working alot. this is the first new build since then.
     
  3. CogitoTesting

    CogitoTesting Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2009
    Posts:
    901
    Location:
    Sea of Tranquility, Luna
    Great news since I was planning to test F-Prot this coming week-end. It is quite a coincidence, now I will be testing the new version :) . Do you know what's new?
     
  4. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    It's been 15 months since the last release and from what I can see it is mainly a bug fix and an engine upgrade to 4.5.0; so no major changes/improvements.

    Progress is very slow at Frisk and it takes ages nowadays even to fix minor bugs; but at least it looks like they will have a version compatible with Windows 7, when this OS is officially released.

    Normally, it will probably be awhile for the change logs to appear on the main site
     
  5. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    The good thing about F-prot is still the 29$/5 computers deal.
     
  6. Sully

    Sully Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2005
    Posts:
    3,719
    It used to be a very slim AV with pretty decent detection. It also had the great feature of having ftp/http available definitions. This way you could update it yourself. The newer versions now have dropped that feature and they have been quite bloated compared to thier predecessors. I stopped using it when thier new versions came out. I think 3x was the old one before the newer one. I tried it, and honestly thought it was a huge disappointment. How are thier detection rates these days?

    Sul.
     
  7. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    I don't think AV Comparatives tested F Prot. I seem to remember some disagreement in the past, and prior to stopping including F Prot the detection rates were among the lowest.

    Hopefully this has changed, but for me, I would not consider it until I saw a test from AVC.

    Regards,
    Jerry
     
  8. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    If you ignore ShadowServer, past and recent results generally place it mid- table for detection.

    For example see recent test at Virus bulletin.
     
  9. philby

    philby Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Posts:
    940
    Just for info: Returnil has partnered with Frisk for the Virus Guard component of the forthcoming new RVS 2010.

    Good decision?

    philby
     
  10. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Security vendors who have no malware scanner in their product do not always pick the best AV for integration; the bean counters in the company make sure of that ;)

    So Frisk may simply be offering the best license terms to Returnil.
     
  11. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Good decision? I am pretty sure if you are a bean counter for Returnil. Why does it need a AV anyway.
     
  12. philby

    philby Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Posts:
    940
    My thought exactly.
     
  13. the Tester

    the Tester Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2002
    Posts:
    2,854
    Location:
    The Gateway to the Blue Hills,WI.
    I don't understand why an av guard would be needed in the program either.
     
  14. Kevin523

    Kevin523 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Posts:
    72
    I don't think an AV in Returnil is a terrible idea - think about it. Returnil is only good once you reboot and it reverts changes back to a previous state. Well what if you get a virus in the current session before reboot - say a keylogger and it just starts logging your data before you reboot - returnil isnt going to help you there because when you reboot even though the keylogger is gone it's already done it's job in the current session. Also, there are indeed viruses and malware that escape a reboot with returnil - so perhaps this is an extra layer of protection?
     
  15. Frammi

    Frammi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Posts:
    3
    Speaking for FRISK, I agree that updates have been much too uncommon in the past two years. We're ready to push out new releases more frequently from now on.
     
  16. Martijn2

    Martijn2 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I hope they are not relying on simple signatures for protection against that... :blink:
     
  17. vijayind

    vijayind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Posts:
    1,413
    Just minor changes done ... no resurrection.
    http://www.f-prot.com/news/gen_news/090811_release_win6092.html
     
  18. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Even though they are updating it, i consider F-Prot to be a dead project really.
    They are not mentioned around, i don't hear any good successes in detections of spreading malware, nothing. Also ever since Michael left them, they seem to be stagnating again, just updating the tech developed at that time.
     
  19. larryb52

    larryb52 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Posts:
    1,126

    that's your opinion, I still respect what they do, no it may not be up to what other user desire in so called 'in the cloud' technology but what they do the best they can & don't BS you with tech terms. I sometimes just like an AV that is based on signatures...the others seem to have a lot of false positive, that's worse IMHO...
     
  20. Coldmoon

    Coldmoon Returnil Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Posts:
    2,981
    Location:
    USA
    Hi,
    Don't mean to interrupt the flow, but thought I would provide some answers for the RVS 2010 specific commentary:

    @philby, The Tester, and trjam:

    Kevin523 summed up an important part of why an AM component was added. ISR on its own can only do three things:

    1. Drop all changes
    2. Save some changes
    3. Save all changes

    This leaves a gap that must be closed. It also provides an excellent means for closing the other potential gap where ISR circumventing malware is concerned. The most important considerations from our perspective are time to removal and performance rather than specific detection as we know that anything other than those specifically targeted families of anti-ISR malware will be gone with a restart of the computer.

    The criteria here is not if the AM detects all malware, it is only critical that it be able to reliably detect SPECIFIC types of malware...

    Hi Martijn2,
    No, signatures are not the end of the Virus Guard. Frisk is only a part of what we are doing on the AM front. The most recent RVS 2010 Betas include targeted AE functionality and behavioral/sample data collection (optional). Further, we will be expanding later 3x and 4x generation versions with new capabilities we are already developing.

    But keep in mind what I sad above. It is more important to be able to focus on the actual threats rather than trying to detect everything. Security is about reducing risk. To RVS, the greatest risk comes from anything designed to circumvent the virtualization feature and for this, Frisk offers very reliable and effective capabilities to the whole.

    Mike
     
  21. the Tester

    the Tester Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2002
    Posts:
    2,854
    Location:
    The Gateway to the Blue Hills,WI.
    Thanks Coldmoon for explaining why you are incorporating a Frisk antivirus component.
    That makes sense.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.