Group Details Private

Global Moderators

Forum wide moderators

Member List

T Tom
  • RE: IcoFX - No longer shown after Update to 3.4 (Bug)

    @OLLI_S Yes, we still have it, but we need to split it into channels, to support that.
    With proper versions, I mean adding Specific Rules.

    posted in Detection Issues
  • RE: HideAway - App-Request

    @OLLI_S The difference is that MailWasher isn't a generic term, it seems to be a unique name, and it returns the correct result when you search for it.

    If you search for HideAway you get pizzerias, restaurants, novels, and all kinds of stuff.

    Again, we need to avoid ambiguity, thus I'd rather err on the side of having more details in the name.

    posted in App Requests
  • RE: Valve Steam Client - Alter Product Name

    While Steam seems to be more prevalent than Origin, I still hold the same opinion as I posted in my response to your post about Origin.

    posted in Detection Issues
  • RE: Origin - Alter Product Name

    This one is again a borderline issue. I believe we have touched this topic a couple of times before.

    Some products, despite being very well know and widely used, have names that are generic. Origin is generic, it is used in many other relations, also within the IT realm.

    Given that a large part of our users are IT-professionals that monitor work PCs it is of value for them to know that this is Electronic Arts Origin, rather than having to spend time on looking it up.

    I do realize that EA intend to market this as "Origin" rather than "Electronic Arts Origin", but we still need to avoid ambiguity. Thus, like with versions, if there is doubt. we'd rather err on the side of too much detail, than too little.

    In short, this won't be changed, unless we decide to show product names in a different way.

    posted in Detection Issues
  • RE: Toolbox for VulnDetect - App-Request

    @OLLI_S It is hard to argue with the develop himself.

    But again I have to disagree.

    Currently we have 7 rules for the Toolbox. All are 3.0, yet they are different builds.

    If we don't show the build information, how can we tell users to upgrade to the latest build?

    This is a good example of a case where we disregard whatever the software developer shows or publishes, because else we can't tell the difference, so we'd rather err to the side of having too much details, rather than too little.

    Btw. which version and build is the latest and recommended? Is it still 3.0 build 120?

    posted in App Requests
  • RE: CPU-Z (Portable) - App-Request

    @OLLI_S I can see I gave the same answer more than a year ago 😉

    posted in App Requests
  • RE: CPU-Z (Portable) - App-Request

    @OLLI_S I disagree.

    This is the eternal problem of software developers being inconsistent.

    Try to have a look at the website, they consistently report it as 1.xx, all the way since February 2013. The only exceptions were 1.71.1 and 1.72.1 in 2014 / 2015.

    As a general rule of thumb we will rely on versions as displayed on Download pages or Version History pages.

    https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html#version-history

    posted in App Requests
  • RE: Update does not work in non admin account

    @GregAlexandre When you request an inspection, it doesn't happen immediately. What happens is that you send a request to our backend, our backend schedules it for you agent and the next time your agent checks-in it will see that it needs to conduct a scan.
    So when you request things via the UI everything will happen as LocalSystem.

    It is only the OLLI's ToolBox that behaves different, because it interacts directly with the local .exe file.

    With regards to updates, then you are right, LocalSystem does not provide interactive mode and this does cause issue for some installers. We do regularly test workarounds for this, but we did not yet find a good solution that works for all installers that require this.

    Fortunately, most software developers do provide sane installers that work in silent or quiet mode.

    This is always something that we test before we release a package for a given product. If it can't be done silently in a reliable way, then we won't support the software (with packages).

    In general we only support updating software that has been installed as an Admin user (into e.g. Program Files), we do not currently support per user installations (e.g. in C:\Users). With Zoom being one notable exception, because their installer is smart enough to cover both.

    posted in Bugs and issues
  • RE: Crashed update ends with a persistent "Update" icon

    Hi,
    The VulnDetect Agent is responsible for running updates, it runs as a Service with LocalSystem privileges, thus approving an update is not related to what user you are currently logged in as.

    I have just reviewed the outputs from running the Skype installer and it appears to be correct.

    I would appreciate if you could click "Update" once more and tell me if it actually does update. It may take a couple of minutes before you can see the result.

    If for some reason it fails, then please send me a chat message with the email address of your account and I shall look at your account specifically and see what issues you have.

    posted in Bugs and issues
  • RE: IcoFX - No longer shown after Update to 3.4 (Bug)

    @OLLI_S Fixed. Proper versions will be added later.

    posted in Detection Issues