What is happening with Prevx1?

Look at this image and see what is wrong here. This is the newest prevx1 downloaded and freshly installed some days ago. It has the KAV ADS tag on it and is being automatically blocked. The thing is I don't run KAV 5.0 here. This is weird. I get 49 entries of these when I run Prevx1 after shutting it off manually. ADS Spy doesn't even find this.

dja2k

 

Have you run/trialed KAV 5 in the past while PrevX1 was installed?

Blue

 

Couple questions. Have you ever run Kav? What AV do you run, as it may be based on the Kav engine.

 

Online Armor uses the KAV engine iirc (I see you have it in your signature)

 

Here is some info on KAVICHS from the Kaspersky website.
There is also a zip file to remove it.

http://www.kaspersky.com/faq?qid=170884737

 

Never ran KAV 5.0 and Online Armor AV+ (KAV engine) doesn't use the alternative streams like other versions of KAV. Look at the location, its inside the Prevx1 directory and that is the only location I get with that ADS string.

dja2k

 

You are not alone in this situaion. http://www.google.com/search?q=KAVI...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

 

Ummm... I think that your Google search will produce discussions about dissatisfaction with KAV's use of KAVICHS, whereas (unless I am mis-reading) dja2k's issue is with the inexplicable appearance of KAVICHS on Prevx. Since dja2k hasn't used KAV, where did that KAVICH schtuff on his Prevx's "blocked" list come from, I wonder?

 

Have you ever ran an online scan with kaspersky? When you run their online scan an ActiveX and many of their program files are installed on your computer.

 

Point well taken. Was only meant as a starting point for trouble shooting, not as a cure.

 

Never ran a KAV scan online nor had KAV 5.0 installed, only KAV reference I have is from Online Armor AV+ and it doesn't have ADS.

dja2k

 

According to a quick Google, OLA+ dose use the Kav engine.

 

We're looking into the specifics, but it does appear to be OA-AV+ setting off the self-protection policies, as only Prevx1 processes are allowed to access this folder to keep malware from disabling/modifying Prevx1.

 

Hi, folks: Since there is a serious, open and unanswered privacy issues concerning its rival, CyberHawk. I can not help but thinking about this well-received, highly praised application. Does Prevex 1 have similiar issue as CH, sort of community sharing info? I remember its last life, Prevex home and prevex Pro, freeware and paidware respectively. The first had a call-home feature, in order to perfect the pro version. I wish this type of approach has been buried w/ them under 6 feet deep down. Do you still concern at all?

 

Maybe I am just stupid, but, wouldnt any type of software or application be able to do this, that needs to,"Phone home," for updates.

 

Yes, if it is coded to do so. In which case it should be completely and clearly stated in the EULA. I question the need for the gathering of such information under any circumstances.

 

Hi, folks: If I remember it correctly, the PhoneHome feature built in Prevex Home version was more than just for updates.

 

The privacy issue was addressed a couple of times over at CastleCops, here's ONE which links to the other (the other being a little more technical).

 

Hi,folks: hi, notok, your prompt reply has been acknowleged ,thanks, and the link has been viewed, but I need time to digest it.

 

If you have further questions, feel free to bring them up over at the Prevx forums or PM me. Privacy concerns are probably a bit OT for this thread.

 

ANY software to which I give internet access for ANY reason can (potentially) be used to compromise my computer's security &/or my private information.

In my view, a Statement of Privacy is only as trustworthy as the company that issues the statement. For instance, when I read Microsoft's very detailed privacy statement, I can't help but remember their WGA push-package -- which more than a few categorized as out-&-out spyware.

Frankly I DO trust all the software companies that I have enabled to connect to the internet, but my concern is this -- what if they are bought out by a company with ulterior motives?

I have asked about this issue in THIS Wilder's thread but so far have received only anecdotal answers. I am still hopeful that one of the security gurus, such as Stem or Paranoid or Notok, will offer technically sound ways to protect sensitive data while still enabling me to *fearlessly* participate in communities, automatic updates, and so forth.

 

i would also like to know the same thing.
lodore

 

Seem my thread got hijacked and lost its main point. Back to the topic of what is going on with prevx1, I found out by uninstalling and reinstalling prevx1 that it now has another different repeat offender. The KAV ADS problem doesn't come up anymore, at least I think it doesn't.

dja2k