Windows Vista: McAfee DAT Classifies Vista Component as a Trojan
- 10/21/08 10:37 AMMcAfee DAT Classifies Vista Component as a Trojan
by Grif Thomas - 10/21/08 10:37 AM
For those using the retail version of McAfee VirusScan, please read the information below:
See the information below:
http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_100683.htm
"The 5409 DAT files contain an incorrect identification on PWS-LegMir. McAfee Avert Labs have released DAT 5410 to correct this issue. The false detection is being seen on the following file:
* conime.exe - Windows Vista console IME (MD5: F96EBC5A624349D81DCC7600A3C5DC43) "
______________
If you're running the current "retail" versions of VirusScan, follow the instructions below to fix the issue:
Download extra.dat from www.mvrsupport.com/extra.zip & save it to the desktop
Extract extra.zip to C:\Program Files\McAfee\Virus Scan\DAT\5409.0\
Restart the system
Check if conime.exe is present in System32 folder
If it is not found, download the same from www.Mvrsupport.com/conime.zip and extract it to system32 folder.
If you're using a corporate version of VirusScan, simply download the newest Superdat or XDat file from the link below and manually update your machines.
http://www.mcafee.com/apps/downloads/security_updates/dat.asp?region=us&segment=enterprise
Hope this helps.
Grif
McAffee
by SerengetiValley - 10/27/08 7:38 AM In reply to: McAfee DAT Classifies Vista Component as a Trojan by Grif Thomas
McAfee! *shudder*
Off-topic: I hate that program. The corporate version of McAfee would not catch a couple of trojans on my thumb drive, that the *free* version of AVG stopped at the gates lol. I'd look to the others...Avira, AVG, Kaspersky for a/v solutions. I simply don't like McAffee...too bloated and pretty much useless.
So what are we reading here?
by Dango517 - 10/28/08 12:20 AM In reply to: McAfee DAT Classifies Vista Component as a Trojan by Grif Thomas
The way I read it, they have a definition(?) in their software that is incorrect and because it is incorrect, could be letting a Trojan in/through to users systems. Is this correct? Anyone reading this another way?
(NT) It declares a Windows file to be malicious and deletes it.
by John.Wilkinson - 10/28/08 4:03 PM
In reply to: So what are we reading here? by Dango517
Exactly As John States..
by Grif Thomas - 10/28/08 5:15 PM
In reply to: So what are we reading here? by Dango517
Your interpretation is incorrect. The conime.exe file is detected as a virus and is deleted.. That's why the "conime.zip" file was provided.. So users could replace the incorrectly removed file.
At this point, in fact the same day McAfee was notified, a new DAT was created to eliminate the false positive detection.
Hope this helps.
Grif
(NT) Thank you
by Dango517 - 10/28/08 7:53 PM In reply to: So what are we reading here? by Dango517
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
