Most antivirus I tested, even the paid ones, are so annoying with popups and complaining about cracks that I just take the risk and go without em

  • demibaka@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is impossible, all antivirus will give false positive sometimes and they will be annoying since they need to be intrusive to “catch” some virus

        • OsaErisXero@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          He’s downloading cracks or cracked executables

          The cracking groups aren’t exactly signing their work with a verifiable public key

          • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Yeah but that should be okay as long as he’s getting it from legitimate places (rarbg, official fitgirl site, cs.rin.ru, rutracker etc).

            I’ve not had an AV for like 10+ years, had defender disabled with GPO as soon as I installed W10 and had no issues.

            The best AV is your brain. Obviously if you download GTA_6 _(Brazil)_by_xP3tYa1337x.pdf.html with an embedded .hta directly from an IP address in Kamchatka and you have IE installed then yeah maybe you need to give things a manual scan pass with defender or malwarebytes (or just toss it in a VM) once in a while but otherwise you’re golden.

            Even most vulns today labeled 0day are either unexploitable or require the user to be a dumb motherfucker.

            Trust me.

  • charade_you_are@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 months ago

    malwarebytes will flag cracks like all the others but when I used to clean computers for a living, it rarely gave a false positive and found the most bullshit on Windows pcs. This was a few years back so I don’t keep up with how it is these days.

  • Greg Clarke@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    4 months ago

    Have you considered getting NordVPN? A YouTuber told me it protects against 100% of hackers

    • casmael@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      4 months ago

      just like our sponsor - nordvpn™️. I use nordvpn™️ to protect against hackers when using public wifi - and now you can too with the code ‘myballs’ - get 99% off a one year subscription to nordvpn™️ today

    • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Wow that’s so Narwhal Bacon, I heard about NordVPN while watching my daily Skibidi Raid Shadow Legends content while eating my World of Tanks themed Factor meal with extra soy while trying to ignore my dad beating my mom after his BetterHelp appointment

  • zaknenou@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    probably I will be punished for this comment but: Kaspersky
    second best AV is Malwarebytes,
    there is a subreddit for ranking them r/antivirus or something

  • Rex GNŪrum@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    I haven’t used an Antivirus in years… That’s one advantage of GNU OS’s. I run cracks inside sandboxes which then run Wine and DXVK for compatibility.

  • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    4 months ago

    You’re not going to find an AV that doesn’t flag modifications as virus/malware. That’s kind of the definition of malicious behaviour by a program.

    Hell, Windows itself will overwrite changes you make to certain exscutables/dll’s, etc, with its own file protection system.

    Test your cracks in a VM. Then use them as needed, or do the cracking in a VM.

    • vegeta@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Windows defender claimed they’re bad because they are cracks, and doesn’t mention any reason it thinks that would be a virus/trojan or something I dont want

      “HackTool:Win32/crack” from games downloaded on fitgirl repacks site (the correct one)

      • elfpie@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Isn’t that a matter of behavior? The crack is doing something expected from a crack and the system warns you because most wouldn’t use it without being aware. If you really trust the file, add it as an exception.

        Or do you want a software that can vet good cracks from bad cracks?

          • 0xtero@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            4 months ago

            Enterprise antivirus products have had PUP (Potentially Unwanted Program) category forever. Seems its categorized as “HackTool” so not malware.

          • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            4 months ago

            Cracks modify executables…classic malware/virus behaviour. Almost the definition of malware.

            Which is why windows uses a file protection system since at least XP

          • MrAlternateTape@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 months ago

            Not at all, a crack does something to an executable file that you use. Malware would do the exact same thing.

            • dactylotheca@suppo.fi
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              But you generally want that crack to do something to an executable. Do antivirus etc. tools just heuristically flag everything that looks like it modifies an executable? Lots of legitimate dev tools do that too, so it seems like it’d give a lot of false positives, but I haven’t used Windows in ages so 🤷

              • MrAlternateTape@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                4 months ago

                Well, how is the system supposed to know that you want the crack to do something to that executable? The anti virus just sees something is happening and flags it. It does not see a difference.

                • dactylotheca@suppo.fi
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I definitely get what you mean, I just have no idea if antivirus tools flag anything that looks like it modifies executables. My edit to the comment you’re replying to may not have propagated to your instance yet, so here’s what I added:

                  Do antivirus etc. tools just heuristically flag everything that looks like it modifies an executable? Lots of legitimate dev tools do that too, so it seems like it’d give a lot of false positives, but I haven’t used Windows in ages so 🤷

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Windows defender only lets you whitelist by file, folder, or process. You could whitelist a specific folder, but if you want to whitelist by category you’ll have to use a different antivirus product.

  • MajesticFlame@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I use ESET and rate of false positives is very low for me (as long as you disable detect “potentially unwanted applications”, it asks during installation).

  • rockhandle@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    You’re not going to find an antivirus that isn’t intrusive because that is their entire duty. However, Kaspersky has a very high malware detection rate compared to other AV solutions

  • BlanK0@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    If u are on Linux I recommend using firejail on the executable

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      How do you know you never had malware if you have no means to check for malware? It’s not like it will announce itself.

        • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’ve also been online and pirating for 25+ years and your bragging horseshit is hilarious

          Fuck off mate, we’ve all had browser toolbars and had to reinstall windows multiple times in the past. Not so common now but before it was part of the deal

          Don’t be a dick, you’re not impressing anyone

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 months ago

          There’s a lot of malware that just chills in the background and hides itself well (e.g., auto-shuts down whenever task manager is opened), and does little to impact you aside from using some of your system’s resources.

          Think being part of a botnet used for DDOS attacks, or a cryptominer that runs whenever you aren’t using much of your hardware’s capabilities.