G-Data 2015-Is The Release Candidate Available?

You're right.
I checked the ImgBurn download and I checked my ImgBurn installer archive - both are blocked by G Data!
To be able to download and/or install ImgBurn, the G Data user needs to make an exception for SetupImgBurn* in G Data anti-virus real-time protection.

That shouldn't be the case, of course.
Especially because I reported the ImgBurn issue to G Data SecurityLabs early July. I thought G Data should have corrected that issue by now. But they didn't.
Today I reported to G Data Support, and asked for my report to be forwarded to G Data SecurityLabs.

Regarding the other issues that you mention, I can't say anything about that. Reporting to G Data would be best, but I can understand that you didn't and simply dismissed G Data as a viable product to deploy.

 

I was just testing the trial for a day or so. I like the idea behind it for sure, and like how they switched to their own secondary engine. They've come a long way, especially in terms of system weight. But when GData entirely prevented Postbox from working I had to remove it sooner rather than later.

 

S-Man,

~ Removed Off Topic Remarks ~

BankGuard seems like an excellent module. I've sort of ignored it. But I'm going to pay more attention to it.

One commentator stated this:

G Data BankGuard is a module dedicated specifically to protect users so banking attacks. Its use is to prevent cybercriminals from eavesdropping on communications between the user and the browser (attacks called man-in-the-middle). This communication is the weak link for many times hackers penetrate, and no matter how safe you are online platforms of banks since the data are stolen before they reach the bank. With the advent of the module to protect the keyloggers, G Data stands as one of the most reliable (if not more) dangerous banking Trojans against alternatives.
​

It sorta seems like that was translated or something... as a few things don't add up in that paragraph. But just ignore the awkward wording and understand the intent of the author, a software engineer.

And as always, TRUST IN GERMAN SICHERHEIT.

 

In my September 11, 2014, post, I reported about G Data BankGuard false positives and how I wondered if there was any relation with EMET 5.0.
I've had about twelve G Data BankGuard false positives in the period August 3 till October 12.
The October 12 BankGuard false positive has been the last.
A dump file from that October 12 BankGuard detection was analyzed by G Data Labs.
G Data Labs informed me that the BankGuard false positive issue probably was not related to EMET 5.0.
October 28, my computer was set up to get a BankGuard dump and additionally also a dumplog with next BankGuard false positives, for further analysis by G Data Labs, but there have been no more BankGuard detections since October 12.
I guess the G Data program update to 25.0.2.3 fixed the BankGuard false positive issue.
According to KHL64's post at Rokop Security that update to G Data version 25.0.2.3 should increase G Data BankGuard stability and should reduce BankGuard false positives.
I suppose it did the trick.

 

October 7, 2014, I mentioned that I had reported to G Data Support, regarding the fact that the G Data software blocks download and installation of ImgBurn.
A couple of days ago, I noticed a similar harsh blocking of the FreemakeVideoDownloaderFull.exe installer.

First early July, and later October and November, I have had quite an extensive correspondence with G Data, regarding the G Data software tendency of blocking adware supported installers.

The end of the story is that the current G Data policy is that the G Data software blocks OpenCandy supported installers (and other adware supported installers) like the ImgBurn installer.
This is by 'popular demand' of part of the G Data user base, those that are unable to handle adware supported installers.
Think of it what you want, but this is how it is.

However,
advanced users can use the G Data user interface,
go to Settings > AntiVirus > Real-Time Protection > Advanced
and disable "Check for dialers/ spyware/ adware/ riskware".
I don't think it would be very wise to make that your default setting, but you can temporary make that setting when you need to download, install, copy, or sync adware supported installers like for instance the ImgBurn installer.
You don't hear me saying this is ideal.
Let's hope the G Data developers will come up with a more sophisticated solution, in an update to the G Data software, or at least in next year's edition.

 

@Stupendous Man
Glad you have that problem fixed.

 

Yes, thanks, it is good that BankGuard false positives issue seems to be fixed.

However, I see the current G Data policy to block OpenCandy supported installers (and possibly other adware supported installers as well) as another new issue, as I also mentioned, November 27.
As I described, there is a workaround, but I find it quite bothersome to disable "Check for dialers/ spyware/ adware/ riskware" for each time I need to download, install, copy, move, or sync any adware supported installer that is listed by G Data. Even for simply opening a folder in which such an installer is stored I need to disable "Check for dialers/ spyware/ adware/ riskware", otherwise the G Data software will block access to that installer.
I think the current G Data policy to block adware supported installers is a kind of obsessive madness.

I suggested G Data to modify the software so that the user can disable "Check for adware" full-time and keep "Check for dialers/ spyware/ riskware" enabled, but I have had no feedback to that suggestion.
I can only hope the G Data developers will come up with some sophisticated solution in an update to the G Data software, preferably soon, or at least with next year's edition.

I like the G Data software for it's good detection, and for not having some negative aspects that are in other top anti-virus products, but G Data's new policy to block OpenCandy supported installers (and possibly other adware supported installers as well) that is annoying the **** out of me.

 

G Data TotalProtection 2016 Beta released

h**p://www.comss.ru/page.php?id=1724

 

Thanks!

 

Ah, thanks, marciocruz.

I haven't seen the comss.ru page (cause of the Quttera and the Zscaler Zulu results).
But I've had a look at
https://beta.gdata.de/
and the G Data 2016 Beta thread at Rokop Security.
I'll try to keep an eye on that Rokop Security thread. Except from the usual "It's only 2014" the Rokop Security threads are usually quite informative and interesting.

 

Well, here's another nice mess G Data had -almost- gotten me into.
I'm a little exaggerating of course, but I didn't like what I found.

Earlier, G Data offered the INT_R_FUL_2015_IS.exe installer.
Since rather recently, only the INT_R_BASE_2015_IS.exe installer is offered.
I thought the BASE installer didn't contain the virus signatures, so those needed to be downloaded after installation, but except from that the BASE installer was the same as the "FUL" installer, an installer capable for offline installation - or so I thought.
I was wrong.
Today I found out the BASE installer needs an internet connection to install the program, so it is in fact an online installer.
I do not like that a bit.
When installing the G Data software to a system without anti-virus protection, I want to perform an offline installation, without any need for making any internet connection.
I think it is quite bad that G Data now only offers an "online installer".
I was shocked to find out.
I contacted G Data Support (Netherlands/Belgium) to notify G Data of my dismay.
G Data Support promised to forward my concern to the G Data main office, but could not offer the "FUL" installer in any way.
I hope the G Data main office will bring back the "FUL" installer download option - but that was not for now, when I wanted it for installation.
To my luck, I found a November 4th "FUL" installer download in my backups that I could use, so I was still able to do an offline installation as I wanted to.

I really hope G Data will bring back the "FUL" installer download option, to offer the user an offline installation option.
If not, that will be an issue to me.
Together with the current G Data policy to block adware supported installers, which I mentioned November 27 and December 2, and which I think is highly annoying, G Data is making it's products less and less appealing to me.

[Edit: typo corrected]

 

uuhm, there is no risk whatever if on the system the windows firewall is turned ON prior of connecting to internet and the only action you will perform is to run the GDATA installer.

 

Probably.
But why not just offer the "FUL" installer that is capable for offline installation, like G Data offered before.
I'm likely not be the only user preferring an offline installation. Other companies like Kaspersky and Bitdefender offer installers capable for offline installation (although Bitdefender only offers the offline installer download link at the Bitdefender forum).
I can't see why G Data would switch from offering an installer capable for offline installation to an installer that needs internet connection to install the program. The only thing that I can think of is that the "BASE" installer is about half the file size of the "FUL" installer, which may be nice for those with a very limited internet speed. Although the missing data needs to be downloaded later, with installation, so I can't see what the benefit would be! If reducing the file size is the reason for switching to offering the "BASE" installer, it would be nice if G Data would offer both, and let the user decide which installer to choose.

 

+1 , stupid move from them to only offer online installer.

 

I personally never understood this "psychosis" of needing the offline installer. There are very limited scenario in which you may need it (e.g. working on infected systems). Otherwise there is no security issue whatsoever, on top, if a user have problems with internet speed/cost/capacity then you should not install a signature based AV in the first place.

 

It could also be just a personal preference, fax. And we can't put judgement on each of them.