F-Prot for Dos not scanning all files

Art wrote:
> Well, that proves you're a newby here I've been one of the strongly
> anti-virus/malware posters here for many years.

That just shows you are dedicated. You could still be malicious too -
the most dangerous sort

> >Also, are there any recent reviews available for this scanner?
>
> I highly doubt that. My own tests using varioous kinds of malware
> always showed that KAVDOS32 compares identically in detection to
> recent Windows versions of KAV. Much of the detection capability is in
> the data bases you update. KAV is much better than F-Fprot in several
> respects. I've quit offering F-Prot for DOS updaters/emergency disks,
> etc. since KAVDOS32 is so much better.

I'm worried that it might miss something that is not obvious at first
glance.
I doubt that it can scan the new rar format without an engine update
for example.

But anyway, as a third scanner it can't hurt, I will probably test it
out in vmware first thought.

On 10 Jun 2006 13:50:45 -0700, "Hugo Trebl" <singalong.RemoveThis@dodgeit.com>
wrote:

>Hi all
>I want to use F-Prot for Dos under Windows XP as a secondary on-demand
>scanner. I like F-Prot for dos for its low overhead.
>
>However, when scanning a whole disc or a large directory, F-Prot will
>usually not scan all files (even with /dumb option) but will stop after
>scanning some files and report it is finished.
>
>For example, when scanning the system drive, F-Prot will stop after 74
>files and report no infections and no errors.
>The last file scanned is
>C:\DOKUME~1\ADMINI~1\LOKALE~1\ANWEND~1\MICROS~1\WINDOW~1\9.0\WMSDKNS.XML
>
>The problem persists on NTFS and on FAT32 discs
>
>I searched the net and found several mentions of this behaviour:
>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.virus/msg/0045d264e0636079?hl=en&
>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.virus/msg/352b7aa1e9c6b669?hl=en&
>http://help.lockergnome.com/security/dos-scanning-program-iles-dir-ftopict1428.html
>
>However, I found no solution so far.
>Is there a solution or workaround available for this program?

No, only a far better alternative. See my web site for my KAVDOS32
utilities.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

On 10 Jun 2006 15:05:43 -0700, "Hugo Trebl" <singalong.TakeThisOut@dodgeit.com>
wrote:

>Art wrote:
>> No, only a far better alternative. See my web site for my KAVDOS32
>> utilities.

>Thanks, it looks promising
>However, don't take this personally, but I usually hesitate to run
>executables from strangers, even after scanning them.

Well, that proves you're a newby here I've been one of the strongly
anti-virus/malware posters here for many years.

>I already have unzip and wget, and I dont need askme.exe if i modify
>the batch file , but I cannot find an official source for kavdos32.exe.
>Kaspersky Lab does not seem to offer it.

It hasn't been available for sale anywhere I could find for quite some
time.

>Could you tell me an official
>source or a way to obtain a checksum for it?

No. I found build 135 in a KAVDOS32.RAR package somewhere on
the internet. Google them up. You'll likely find they're all the same,
for what that's worth .... which is nothing.

>Also, are there any recent reviews available for this scanner?

I highly doubt that. My own tests using varioous kinds of malware
always showed that KAVDOS32 compares identically in detection to
recent Windows versions of KAV. Much of the detection capability is in
the data bases you update. KAV is much better than F-Fprot in several
respects. I've quit offering F-Prot for DOS updaters/emergency disks,
etc. since KAVDOS32 is so much better.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

Art wrote:

> If you choose to be totally paranoid rather than learn whom to trust
> and whom not to trust, you're going to be at a great disadvantage.

As I said, please don't take it personally. It is just that "regular
poster in a group about viruses" rang some alarm bells.

> >I'm worried that it might miss something that is not obvious at first
> >glance.
> >I doubt that it can scan the new rar format without an engine update
> >for example.
>
> Which "new" RAR format is that? I'll check it out.

It is not that new, a few years old, so you probably know it already.
Introduced with Winrar 3.00. Since old versions of winrar cannot
extract it, I presumed that scanners cannot either without update.

> I can tell you that KAVDOS32 is by far the best DOS scanner I've ever
> tested when it comes to handling various compressed and packed
> files ... especially those which are multiply packed with various
> different and unusual packers the bad guys use to confuse av
> scanners. It even handles scanning "within" many Setup and
> Install files.

It is impressive, I admit. It found an (apparent) trojan that Grisoft
AVG, Mcafee, Avast and Clamwin missed, only BitDefender 8 found it
too.(Am currently trying out a couple of scanners in vmware)

> BTW, when is the last time Frisk did any work on the F-Prot for
> DOS scan engine? I remember him posting here saying that it
> hasn't been updated in years.

Cannt comment, I presumed since it is still offered for downlaod, it
still receives updates.

> In putting effort into my utils for KAVDOS32 I'm fully aware
> that I'm dealing with something that is short-lived. DOS scanners
> are going the way of the Dodo bird. Yet, there is now and there
> will be for some time in the future very good and useful purposes
> for a top notch DOS scanner such as KAVDOS32 build 135. But
> F-Prot for DOS has become practically useless in comparison.

I'd be happy with a true on-demand scanner for windows, one that does
not load anything on startup, even for updates. But those seem to be
nearly extinct too.

On 10 Jun 2006 18:29:33 -0700, "Hugo Trebl" <singalong.RemoveThis@dodgeit.com>
wrote:

>Art wrote:
>> Well, that proves you're a newby here I've been one of the strongly
>> anti-virus/malware posters here for many years.
>
>That just shows you are dedicated. You could still be malicious too -
>the most dangerous sort

If you choose to be totally paranoid rather than learn whom to trust
and whom not to trust, you're going to be at a great disadvantage.

>> >Also, are there any recent reviews available for this scanner?
>>
>> I highly doubt that. My own tests using varioous kinds of malware
>> always showed that KAVDOS32 compares identically in detection to
>> recent Windows versions of KAV. Much of the detection capability is in
>> the data bases you update. KAV is much better than F-Fprot in several
>> respects. I've quit offering F-Prot for DOS updaters/emergency disks,
>> etc. since KAVDOS32 is so much better.
>
>I'm worried that it might miss something that is not obvious at first
>glance.
>I doubt that it can scan the new rar format without an engine update
>for example.

Which "new" RAR format is that? I'll check it out.

I can tell you that KAVDOS32 is by far the best DOS scanner I've ever
tested when it comes to handling various compressed and packed
files ... especially those which are multiply packed with various
different and unusual packers the bad guys use to confuse av
scanners. It even handles scanning "within" many Setup and
Install files.

BTW, when is the last time Frisk did any work on the F-Prot for
DOS scan engine? I remember him posting here saying that it
hasn't been updated in years.

In putting effort into my utils for KAVDOS32 I'm fully aware
that I'm dealing with something that is short-lived. DOS scanners
are going the way of the Dodo bird. Yet, there is now and there
will be for some time in the future very good and useful purposes
for a top notch DOS scanner such as KAVDOS32 build 135. But
F-Prot for DOS has become practically useless in comparison.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

On 10 Jun 2006 18:29:33 -0700, "Hugo Trebl" <singalong.DeleteThis@dodgeit.com>
wrote:


>I'm worried that it might miss something that is not obvious at first
>glance.
>I doubt that it can scan the new rar format without an engine update
>for example.

I just downloaded a trial of the DOS version of Winrar. It's Version
3.60 Beta 4. I compressed a RAR archive of files using it. KAVDOS32
had no problem scanning all the files "within" the RAR archive.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg