Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by ViVek, Jan 12, 2010.
Hi all i found on web
NANO AntiVirus but is still beta
Isn't this like the 3rd, 4th "new AV" in a week? I'm starting to get a bit suspicious with these posts. *adjusts his tinfoil hat*
For this and other “new anti-virus solutions,” I wonder: what is their competitive advantage? Stated differently, what feature/benefit do they bring to the marketplace that doesn’t already exist? If they are indeed innovating, then that’s great -- but, otherwise YAAV (“yet another anti-virus”) is not advancing the state of the discipline.
Edit: Typing error.
It's a beta -- they are looking for help. I hope one of the AV gurus here ( of which I am NOT one) will give them a hand.
We might have a budding Kaspersky on the horizon -- if folks help them out.
Is Nano a No-No? Nanu nanu!
/s/ Mork from Ork
Give them a chance
The GUI looks good
wot says bad reputation
From the Forum, translated to english, what is the kaspersky reference all about?
This can be done either here or from the quarantine NANO Kaspersky.
Also very help logging NANO Virus (labeled "Send logs to customer support" in the Start Menu \ NANO Kaspersky)
I tried it today .Good looking.
Installation took long time.
Memory usage was around 90MB.
I tested it with 4 malwares( 2 rogues and 2 Troj.downloaders)
It failed all those
I had Smithfraudfix and combofix in my pc. Nano detected those as trojans.
I then tested it with EICAR . It detected .
u can find those pics Here
WHOIS info indicates they use some kind of anonymity service.
The English version of the website is REALLY bad. If you can't do it professionally, then don't do it at all.
Smitfraudfix and Combofix detected as trojans ?
Potentially rogue, IMO.
90 meg!?!? wow
Potentially an over-reaction IMO
The product may be rubbish but using such a reverse-psychology mind-messin' MO as this:
"1.I'm sure the file is infected but NANO AntiVirus reports the file is clear.
Answer: One of the most probable cause is the sample of that virus is not presented in our database. Perhaps you had catch "fresh" just created malware."
on their FAQ page to entice me to download the program is certainly breaking new ground in the rogue-purveyor business.
Was this company set up in 2009?The introduction of this company on official website is Russian,I can't catch any information.Who can introduce it in detail?
I honesty don't understand why these get posted ether. In a way it's pointless and honesty will just confused newbies to the forum to what might be a viable solution and what might not be. But meh maybe that's just my view.
Thank you for the testing. We scanned last versions of Smithfraudfix and Combofix, it's ok. Can I ask you to send to us your fake files for analysis? Thank you in advance.
Are you sure these 4 malwares are really malwares?
We took a look at pictures you had enclosed and found that you had been using a fake antivirus for detecting of these malwares.
~Link to questionable software removed. Ron~
What was the 'fake antivirus' ?
If I had to guess which one was 'fake', it would be Nano.
Unfortanutely my link was removed, so I meant "Personal Security" which interface you can see on the pic of nikanthpromod.
Sorry if we misunderstood, but we want to ask nikanthpromod.
As for your previous post:
What do you mean?
Looks pretty normal to me.
nserver: ns.nanoav.ru. 126.96.36.199
state: REGISTERED, DELEGATED, VERIFIED
org: OOO "e-Style ISP"
phone: +7 495 7969797
nikanthpromod didn't use Personal Security to detect malwares. He installed it on purpose and then installed Nano Antivirus to test if Nano Antivirus would detect and remove the "fake antivirus" (Personal Security). Unfortunately it didn't.
Say, if you (Nano AV's developper I guess) actually know that Personal Security was a "fake antivirus", why did't Nano Antivirus detect it?
The reason is simple. That "fake antivirus" is not in our virus base yet.
Any help is appreciated. If you have this sample, please send it to us and we will add it in the next update of our virus base. You can use the form on our site, which address you will find in my profile.
Why does a Google search for Nano Antivirus suggest that it is rogue?
Search results are full of "How to remove Nano antivirus" pages.
Because there was a fake av variant called nano av a while back.
Then how do you know when it isn't fake/rogue ?
Too many new AVs/antimalwares without any solid background. At best, they are just ineffective.
Why post them at this board ? People want to play with them ?
IMO, 'playing' is all they are good for.
If it requires signatures, it requires a lot of resources. Generally, these new ones don't have that. Why take a risk when there are some many AVs that have a good reputation and are tested, more or less objectively ?
You are not objective. I understand why you don't want to use a new AVs. But draw attention we have the reliable site with "live" forum, the support by e-mail, ICQ, Skype, phone, the twitter page. Our company registered in DUNS (683521635). We are registered partners of Microsoft. Our files are duly signed by Verisign certificate. We have juridical address and so on. You can doubt our efficiency but you can't allege our product is rogue.
Separate names with a comma.