Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'paths'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Lavasoft - Announcements (Read only)
    • Announcements
  • Product Support
    • adaware antivirus 12
    • Ad-Aware 11
    • adaware ad block & web protection
    • Ad-Aware Web Companion
    • General support
    • Old versions and other Lavasoft products
  • Request a Feature
    • adaware antivirus
    • adaware ad block
  • Malware Removal Help
    • Help with Stubborn Infections
    • Malware Uploads
  • False Positives
    • Report a False Positive
  • Beta Testing
    • Ad-Aware 12 Beta Testing
  • FAQ's
  • Archived Topics
    • Archives: Resolved/Inactive Topics

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 1 result

  1. Greetings! I'm testing Adaware, starting with the free version (12.0.649.11190, running on Windows 10 Pro v 1607 - I've not updated to the "Creators'" version yet), to see if it'll be suitable for my purposes, as I run a number of cryptocurrency miners and practically everyone that makes anti-malware software treats a miner as a trojan. So, exclusions are the name of the game. However, Adaware's automated scans seem to ignore exclusions. This is a problem. A big, big problem. I've had Adaware destroy the miner on my testbed system twice now, both times thanks to an automated scan auto-firing overnight and despite having the miner's path clearly listed in the "paths excluded" list. I have since disabled automatic scanning, in order to see if this is a suitable workaround that corrects the behavior. If the miner gets removed a third time, Adaware will be removed immediately after and I'll move on to test something else until I find a product that's well-behaved enough within the context of my usage conditions to justify my money. Is this behavior intended? If so, who thought it was a smart idea to have automatic scans ignore exclusions? Doesn't that defeat the entire point and purpose of having exclusions in the first place?