AVG antivirus while making server?

[Alpo]

Hello all,

I'm wanting to make a small server program that can pass XML files out to computers around my local network. I use the newest version of AVG on the computer I want the server on (they all have it really), also this computer runs Windows.

My question is what should I do about making an exception for the program in AVG?


(Highlighting mine)

For the program not to be deleted on running, it seems I need the bottom checkbox checked (Identity Protection). However, I will need to be able to rebuild the program, because I'm still fairly new to this and want to be able to build it gradually.

The problem is that these options seem to be mutually exclusive, if I check the top one (Even when changed or updated) the bottom one that I need becomes inactive automatically.

My question is what should I do? Do I just need to disable AVG while I'm building and testing, and just add the exception after my program is working? (The exception choices for folders seem to be even more limited than for applications).

Thanks!

[phantomotap]

O_o

I believe the behavior is appropriate.

The interface seems to be saying "all scanners should ignore this file when changed" or "identity protection should ignore this file".

I imagine that you want the "all scanners should ignore this file" option.

Soma

[Mario F.]

Exception rules should only be used for those files that don't behave well in the presence of the antivirus. And not as trust mechanism.

You are trying to exempt a file that could become indeed infected. Does AVG automatically delete files, or do you have a setting that should be enabled so that you get a confirmation box on deletion/quarantine? That is what you should be after.

[phantomotap]

Exception rules should only be used for those files that don't behave well in the presence of the antivirus.

O_o

I admit that I haven't used "AVG" in a long time, but I recall that it was "AVG" throwing up every revision of a project I was working with during debugging because I was linking with a watchdog library.

[Edit]
I'm not saying that the scanner shouldn't have the option.

I just don't think that "AVG" will necessarily behave as desired because of the way the scanner works.
[/Edit]

Soma

[Mario F.]

That is true. I seem to remember AVG becoming a huge pain all around after they switched from a plain virus scanner to the whole Internet Security Suite nonsense that prevails these days. AVG hated gdb for instance(*), and their heuristics just became poorer and poorer since.

It's when I stopped using it. It was thankfully more or less around the time Microsoft launched Microsoft Security Essentials, if I'm not mistaken. I switched and never looked back.

If this is still a problem, then for sure those settings are needed.

-------
(*) it never reported gdb as a virus. Instead when it hooked up to gdb as a part of its normal active scan/protect feature, it would make gdb behave inconsistently or crash. I don't recall the details anymore. I filled a couple of bug reports then that the AVG developers never solved during the time I was still using it.

[Alpo]

Exception rules should only be used for those files that don't behave well in the presence of the antivirus. And not as trust mechanism.

You are trying to exempt a file that could become indeed infected. Does AVG automatically delete files, or do you have a setting that should be enabled so that you get a confirmation box on deletion/quarantine? That is what you should be after.

It does usually give a confirmation box, but for server program I was testing with (it's a tiny program that just calls "listen" in blocking fashion) it doesn't give any option but "Ok", after which it deletes the program. A better confirmation box does seem like the best option, I'll do some research and see if I can't find out anything.

Thanks guys!

[Yarin]

My question is what should I do about making an exception for the program in AVG?

Use bidirection holepunching, that way the firewall will automatically make an exception for you. Of course, you may to have to use UDP instead of TCP then.

[Alpo]

Use bidirection holepunching, that way the firewall will automatically make an exception for you. Of course, you may to have to use UDP instead of TCP then.

Wow, that is a cool technique, I don't think I had ever heard to it before. So I have an intermediate host to pass on two other hosts IP:Port, then the two hosts start sending packets directly to each other, which ends in NAT entries being created for each other?

I don't know if it will help or not, but I'm glad I heard about it lol. I'd like to try it soon with some simple programs.