Chaby wrote:Looks like everyone getting trojan shit and this with SP actually are botters. So GG.
btw. I checked my sro, no trojan, virus or shit.
Uh, no. The way it works is like this.
Antivirus programs work by scanning a file for known binary patterns that are inherent to certain malware. For example, if Virus A had a signature of the following byte pattern: "FF 03 A6 67", then anything that contained that byte sequence would be flagged as having "Virus A". Of course it's not that simple, but you can get the idea.
Now, some anitvirus programs, such the free ones, contain signatures for various stuff that is more likely to trigger a "false positive". It's like those pregnancy tests, that have a % of saying your pregnant but not. (Not like I know anything about those, though). The point is though, free stuff is more likely to not be as good as commercial stuff, which means the better anitvirus will not detect anything, since there isn't any. It just has to do how their algorithms are made to consider if a byte sequence is bad or not (not bashing free scanners either though, there are some that are just as good as the $ ones)
Being a botter or being a legit has
NOTHING to do with how antivirus scanners will detect stuff in the client. Anyone that uploads the sro_client to jotti will get the same virus scan report of there being a supposed" trojan in it.
More so, if you
WERE infected already, you would not all of a sudden get a warning from sro_client.exe, which if you think about what JM said in the virus post they took down, made no sense at all. I mean, how come the client was "safe" before the update, then you download their new update and all of a sudden it's infected?
Case in point, JM changed something in their code again that registers as a false positive virus. If there were a real virus, everyone would be getting it rather than a few people with the less heavy duty scanners.
