6 ms·
Wow. Any idea why?
by sdoering 5y ago
Wow. Any idea why?
- efdee 5y agoMany virusscanners do this, arguably because as an employer you would want to block your employees from running them.
- arthurcolle 5y agoLmao - WHAT? On his own computer, not with any (based on the post) added certs? Madness
- gruez 5y ago>Oh his own computer Company machine is implied.
- arthurcolle 5y agoYou're right, I re-read and that's clear now.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ethbr0 5y agoI'd also be curious what happens if you rename them to {not-keygen}.exe I'd hope it wouldn't make a difference, but my experience with IT security thinking makes me bet the other way.
- httpsterio 5y agoIt sadly doesn't make a difference. I have about a dozen keygens on my machine and they get quarantined unless they're zipped behind a password or zipped into a 7z. Just downloading a zip with a keygens inside, it gets removed from the zip before even unarchiving it.
- ethbr0 5y agoAlso, AFAIK by spec, the manifest of a zip file is unencrypted, even if the zip "is". Most scanners are too brain dead to care, but I have come across a few that still quarantine if the manifest lists a file with a blacklisted extension. Easy solution? Compress to zip, then compress that zip to another zip, with a password. (Yes, I've spent far too long trying to get work done underneath insane corporate security policies)
- 13of40 5y agoGmail will block you from sending a a password-protected ZIP with anything potentially bad in it, like an EXE, because they can see the individual file headers and central directory, like you say. Unfortunately, if you have a ZIP inside a passworded ZIP it also gets considered dangerous and blocked.
- josephcsible 5y agoHere's a workaround: rename the .exe file to a .txt file, then put that in a password-protected zip file. Now braindead security scanners have no choice but to believe that it really is a text file.
- indigochill 5y agoYeah, I once circumvented gmail's antivirus detection by sending a (perfectly legitimate) installer executable as a txt file because gmail apparently just has/had a strict "no files with certain extensions" policy. And IIRC Zendesk applies the same rule to file attachments on support tickets. I had pitched for my team to build a tiny widget that would send attachments to virustotal, but it would have required a license for commercial use and we never had a security incident with files coming into our support center so it never became a priority.
- atatatat 5y ago> we never had a security incident with files coming into our support center ...that you are aware of.
- tinus_hn 5y agoWhile this may sound like a dumb policy, the end result is exactly what you want, a system that makes it impossible to have you download executables without you being aware.
- Hjfrf 5y agoCan confirm that ServiceNow and Outlook have the same workaround.
- kozak 5y agoI renamed it into {not-keygen}.{not-exe} instead. I didn't investigate the issue in details, but I think that Microsoft expects a more enterprisey file name for a legitimate keygen. I should have called it something along the lines of CredentialManager.exe instead :) But I wonder whether it did auto-submit these files to Microsoft together with my private keys. I'm glad that the private keys were in config files outside of the executables, and this probably saved them from being compromised.
- doubled112 5y agoIf everybody started renaming keygens to CredentialManager.exe, would the learning algorithms the AV companies are using start to flag and delete those .exes too? No way, right? What could go wrong?
- habibur 5y agoThat's fall out from the 90s. People hunted for keygen.exe for their sharewares. And some rouge sites will collect many keygens, attach backdoor program with those and then distribute from their site or over bit-torrent. Anti-virus then would scan those files. Looks like modern ones simply delete any such named file without scanning.
- 0x0nyandesu 5y agoAnd this is why the first thing I do with winblows is disable defender. So much for that.
- hulitu 5y agoIt serms that antiviruses today have only antifeatures. The last time i saw an antivirus detect malware was more than 10 years ago. Now the only protection against viruses is common sense, a good backup and another OS to recover what's left after the disaster strikes.
- UnFleshedOne 5y agoThe problem is that you also need backup bank accounts and probably a backup identity after disaster strikes...
- hulitu 5y agoThis depends on your online presence. Even if malware touches my computer it has no access to bank accounts and the amount of personal info is low. I still have to find a better email provider than yahoo or gmail for receipts.
- 0x0nyandesu 5y agoHonestly I've been over it for years. I do real work on Linux and MacOS. Windows is for a handful of games I can't play on Linux. Everytime I try to use windows for work I end up with issues caused by windows update that blows out chunks of my work day.