Rising AV - free edition

And you are positive that its updating even when you are running under LUA? Can you try a manual update and see if it gets executed under LUA?

 

I had rising on my Vista computer for a couple of days and it updated manually and on a schedule with LUA on in the computer without any special settings.

 

Thanks Big C, here when I try to manually update it pops up with a warning about unable to write to the Rising folder. Btw was there any clash with the built in Windows defender on Vista.

 

No I didn't run into that particular problem. It actually worked well.

bigc

 

After 4 reboots and a repair install, I still get the Low Security warning. Maybe it's not important, but I am not comfortable living with a bug in a critical security application such as AV. If there is a basic visible bug such as this, how can I know what invisible bugs exist below the surface?

 

I tried a test with the EICAR file. I renamed it thus:

a........ .....txt.com.

Rising AV would not allow me to access the double-extension test file. So I renamed it thus:

a........... .......................com.

Rising allowed the EICAR file to run, and other AVs will not allow the file to run. This could be a very serious bug in the English version of Rising AV owing to Unicode issues.

Tested systems for this problem: XP SP 1a , SP 2 and SP 3; 2000 SP 1a through SP 4; Win9x/ME.

Can anyone recreate this problem?

Dave

 

That is what we never know, regardless of which software. Usually we hear about them after bugfixes.

 

I got the same results, Rising blocked eicar here as well.

 

Try renaming the file as he did.... that's what he is talking about it would not run one way but if he renamed it another way it ran.

 

I did and warning popped up, it works.

 

Did you try it yourself, Fajo?

I downloaded eicar.txt (no pop-up, because I configured RAV to only scan excutables)
Then I renamed the file to eicar.txt.com.
Then I executed the file with that name, and RAV stops it.

What else?

 

Exactly what I did and it blocks.

 

This is what happens when I try and update it under LUA.

 

Did you check both path names, do they exist?
What happens when you try to perform the copy yourself in a CMD session?

 

Yes they are legit paths, whats happening is that Rising is downloading the update into my Documents and Settings LUA folder and then trying to execute the update and write to program files which is blocked as per LUA rights.

 

No I have not tryed it (Yet) Have ZA im Beta testing for the moment Rising is on my list of things to try. I was just curious because one way he renamed it said it would not let it Thur then he renamed it another way and said it would. so thought maybe there was something there. but if you guys have tryed both ways and it wont let it thur then guess its a glitch with his system.

 

For those testing/using this product- is RAV a product that belongs in the top tier of free antivirus programs (along with Avast, AVG and Antivir)? Or does it belong in the second tier of free av's (PC Tools, etc)? That's assuming a person believes what programs are top and second tier.

 

Don't limit to the free ones, I think a better question would be if Rising competes with the best AV/malware detection period - such as Avira, Kaspersky. After all they offer both a paid and free product with no differences that I know of.

 

In terms of features I would say top tier, but I can not comment of detection rates, since that is an unknown at this time.

 

BigC would not use it when it was 2nd tier. When a well recommended Wilders members plays with it and the HIPS features of AV make it a good overall choice for me.

My criteria
- focusses on protecting the core of your OS = HIPS = zero day protection
- smart scanning features
- light on resources
- AVG, AVAST like detection results (hey Avira is better but a lot slower and lacks the HIPS feature)

Rising has smart real time protection, only downside is that a full scan takes 35 minutes (250 GB disk), upside is that it checks the calculated bin-hash of these scanned programs and does not perform an on-exection scan when programs seems to be unchanged with the hash check.

 

@ wilbertnl & arup

EICAR detection fails if it is renamed and the file name is too long, as was confirmed by seven others who ditched Rising after we found another bad hole. If file creation and file modification are turned of temporarily, File Monitor allows arbitrary bad code to run even with the HIPS set to the max, again confirmed by several others.

I'm steering clear of this stuff for the time being. Rising has still some holes fix. And a hacked web page article containing a trojan, and which discusses the addons for the FF browser, was not detected by Rising. The code ran.

We also found a conflict between the file monitor whitelist and the creation and modification settings: whitelisting does not work always.

 

Let me just say that I was a content AVG free 7.5 customer.
I also was beta tester for Trendmicro when this product was considered number 1.

But with the release of AVG 8, I was unhappy because of the decreased responsiveness of my system.
Trendmicro became a mammoth on my system.

I turned away from Trendmicro and AVG, and I'm happy with Rising as a valuable alternative.

 

Where can I read these confirmations?

I don't intend to offend you but it was not clear to me that your test involved very long file names. I even don't know how long.

 

@dw2108

have you reported any of these findings to the rising people?