It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Having the same issue with Wolfenstein 3D. I ran it through virustotal.com, but this time out of 55 scans, 1 came up with something. Should be concerned?
avatar
Clerk13: Having the same issue with Wolfenstein 3D. I ran it through virustotal.com, but this time out of 55 scans, 1 came up with something. Should be concerned?
One of the things I most enjoy about Defender (Win10x64) is that I never see false positives...or else they are so rare that I've forgotten them. Defender has, otoh, instantly caught and eradicated the 2-3 legitimate nasties I've contracted somehow over the last few years. Tests paid for by the makers of for-cost AV/malware programs, of course, poo-poo Defender and any no-cost AV/malware programs because they want to *sell* us a malware program, instead...;) Norton's and AVG are among the most invasive security programs in terms of interfering with the normal operation of the computer...whereas Defender is the least invasive & has the smallest footprint of them all.
avatar
Clerk13: Having the same issue with Wolfenstein 3D. I ran it through virustotal.com, but this time out of 55 scans, 1 came up with something. Should be concerned?
avatar
waltc: One of the things I most enjoy about Defender (Win10x64) is that I never see false positives...or else they are so rare that I've forgotten them. Defender has, otoh, instantly caught and eradicated the 2-3 legitimate nasties I've contracted somehow over the last few years. Tests paid for by the makers of for-cost AV/malware programs, of course, poo-poo Defender and any no-cost AV/malware programs because they want to *sell* us a malware program, instead...;) Norton's and AVG are among the most invasive security programs in terms of interfering with the normal operation of the computer...whereas Defender is the least invasive & has the smallest footprint of them all.
when I did the scan through virustotal, Cyren was the one who came up and said something was amiss. Norton (surprisingly) never found anything, nor did MalwareBytes, and I trust MalwareBytes more than Norton.
avatar
Clerk13: when I did the scan through virustotal, Cyren was the one who came up and said something was amiss. Norton (surprisingly) never found anything, nor did MalwareBytes, and I trust MalwareBytes more than Norton.
What I found about Malwarebytes, not trying to start any sort of comparison contest here (!), is that when I tried it out it uncovered *44 "possible/probable viruses."* Of course I was immediately taken aback because Defender had turned up 0 infected files just moments before I ran MWB.

For about 5 minutes it looked like I'd be getting a new AV program, and then everything changed...;) I looked through those files flagged one by one to see what the "possible/probable" finds consisted of and, lo and behold, every single one of the "44 possibles" MWB had flagged turned out to be nothing more harmful than a partial registry text string left behind by an uninstall program of some kind...! Every single one of them!...;) There wasn't a virus or a malware program in the lot of them. At that point my respect for Defender rose enormously, as you might imagine...;) Now, partial text strings in the registry do not equate to either viruses or malware, but the intent was to make me believe that MWB was far more effective than Defender (put your favorite AV program here) because it found 44 "things" the other AV program didn't even see. But fortunately I knew enough to realize that 44 false positives does not equal even 1 virus or malware program....;)