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

×
The 241 MB patch that came out at launch time today was failing to install for me because BitDefender flagged it as having a virus (Gen:Variant.Bulz.105905). Anybody else run into this?

In order to bypass this problem, I had to un-quarantine the file "CrashReporter.exe.download" and retry the patch install a 2nd time from GOG Galaxy. Then it blocked "CrashReporter.exe" and I had to un-quarantine that file too and run it a 3rd time. Then it installed without issue.
avatar
burfo1: The 241 MB patch that came out at launch time today was failing to install for me because BitDefender flagged it as having a virus (Gen:Variant.Bulz.105905). Anybody else run into this?

In order to bypass this problem, I had to un-quarantine the file "CrashReporter.exe.download" and retry the patch install a 2nd time from GOG Galaxy. Then it blocked "CrashReporter.exe" and I had to un-quarantine that file too and run it a 3rd time. Then it installed without issue.
Had the same happen with BitDefender, ended up running in circles, uninstalled CP, added the folder to the exception list and am installing yet again. Not impressed.
I got the same. Morover, after turn off and on computer i got some weird boot screen:
"Antivirus on your computer is cleaning your system."
It's weird, got the crash and Bitdefender screaming about it.

Then I uninstalled it all, restarted the computer, went to install it again,
it resumed at 92% and finished up quickly and says I can play?

I shall try it out.
Game worked just fine after the initial hickup.
People should start replacing AVs with common sense with all these false positives. Bitdefender was supposed to be one of the better ones too.
avatar
ToveriJuri: People should start replacing AVs with common sense with all these false positives. Bitdefender was supposed to be one of the better ones too.
The problem with common sense is that it only applies to common problems. Ergo: only to stuff that is outrageously clear to be or not to be a malicious code.
For all other cases you have to be extremely knowledgable on the matter on technical level and even then you can have doubts.

And the thing is, it's rare but STILL A THING, that some developers include code that is dangerously close to classifying as a virus.

And people should not automatically yell "false positive" just because it's a paid product that is SUPPOSED TO BE virus free.
Because technically there were plenty of cases in this industry were "legal viruses" were used.
Think SecuROM - it's basically legalized rootkit considering what it does how on technical level. It's detected as so by MANY av software products.

So before someone starts yelling "false positive" it's better to first wonder WHY it was detected in the first place.
Sure, it can be false positive. There is no such thing as 100% false positive free av product.
But at the same time it's easy to just blindly trust the developer just because you paid for the product.
There MAY be something in this specific detected piece of code that matches malicious software patterns. So it MAY do something similar to "normal" malicious code.
Maybe it accesses certain files automatically (for example making system info sweep upon game crash) in a way that is normally considered not normal or too intrusive or too broad thus classifying as a virus-like behaviour.
Who knows.

Ergo: this may very well be legitimate wrong code. Actual technical analysis is required to actually say.
avatar
ToveriJuri: People should start replacing AVs with common sense with all these false positives. Bitdefender was supposed to be one of the better ones too.
avatar
B1tF1ghter: The problem with common sense is that it only applies to common problems. Ergo: only to stuff that is outrageously clear to be or not to be a malicious code.
For all other cases you have to be extremely knowledgable on the matter on technical level and even then you can have doubts.

And the thing is, it's rare but STILL A THING, that some developers include code that is dangerously close to classifying as a virus.

And people should not automatically yell "false positive" just because it's a paid product that is SUPPOSED TO BE virus free.
Because technically there were plenty of cases in this industry were "legal viruses" were used.
Think SecuROM - it's basically legalized rootkit considering what it does how on technical level. It's detected as so by MANY av software products.

So before someone starts yelling "false positive" it's better to first wonder WHY it was detected in the first place.
Sure, it can be false positive. There is no such thing as 100% false positive free av product.
But at the same time it's easy to just blindly trust the developer just because you paid for the product.
There MAY be something in this specific detected piece of code that matches malicious software patterns. So it MAY do something similar to "normal" malicious code.
Maybe it accesses certain files automatically (for example making system info sweep upon game crash) in a way that is normally considered not normal or too intrusive or too broad thus classifying as a virus-like behaviour.
Who knows.

Ergo: this may very well be legitimate wrong code. Actual technical analysis is required to actually say.
AVs themselves are extremely invasive with system level access you would never want to give to most software and most people use free versions which need to make money somehow. The biggest "virus" on most computers is the third party AV.
Post edited December 12, 2020 by ToveriJuri
avatar
B1tF1ghter: ...
avatar
ToveriJuri: AVs themselves are extremely invasive with system level access you would never want to give to most software and most people use free versions which need to make money somehow. The biggest "virus" on most computers is the third party AV.
Yes and no.

Consumer grade products of this kind don't run on kernel level. There is just no guaranteed way to for example detect a rootkit from within installed system on Windows. Period.
Ergo: these products on Windows don't run DEEP ENOUGH to be ACTUALLY usable for detecting EVERYTHING.

Besides, that really doesn't change anything in the point I brought up.