-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. Weโll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
๐ ๐ฆ๐๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ซ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐ซ๐๐๐ญ๐ฌ ๐๐จ๐ฎ๐ง๐ โ #94
Comments
This is a false alarm and is a sporadic event that cannot be reproduced on everyone's device. If you are worried, you can choose to compile it yourself or give up using it. |
I have scanned it on two different computers but the threats are still being flagged by Avast if they are false positive type of threats @Alex313031 would better off get in touch with Avast support center as did @Blaukovitch with Kaspersky win32ss/supermium#217 (comment) |
Unless we have digital signatures or pay some money to the antivirus vendors to add the browsers to the whitelist, I think these problems will be difficult to solve. I have previously tried to submit false positives to Microsoft, Bitdefender and other vendors, but shortly after the false positive was resolved, the browser was marked as a threat again. In addition, many antivirus software will mark software without digital signatures as threats. For example, they will report a very simple type conversion program written in Go as a virus, even though there is obviously no problem with the code, which is very annoying for developers.
|
Avast loves to find trouble where there isn't so they can panic unsavvy people into paying for their BS. |
@crudebuster @andika207 @gz83 I sent an appeal to Avast. The problem is that anytime we appeal to Microsoft, Kapersky, or Avast, they whitelist the file hash of the current release. When a new release is made, it does the same thing all over again. And sometimes it doesn't trigger any virus warnings at all. It seems to be random, and the "threats" seem to change with each release. I have tried narrowing down some specific codepath or build configuration that causes Thorium to be flagged, whereas Chromium (at least in my personal experience), seems to not be flagged. It's frustrating for sure, because I get issues at least once a month about this, and it causes people to lose trust or worry that I'm spying on them or something. If I ever get expendable money, or enough donations to Thorium, I will definitely invest in getting a developer signature straight from Microsoft, which would put an end to the bullcrap. |
I remember when a developer of a joystick driver for parallel ports (PPJoy) had the drama of having his driver not signed by MS turning into a donation request then finally made him gave up entirely due to hardware aging. |
https://www.reddit.com/r/browsers/comments/1d9o1ay/my_personal_browser_recommendation_for_2024/ |
โ โ โ what's this ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: