0

"How AV software makes sure quarantined files never get executed?"

is a post, where I'm concerned about quarantined files might still pose a possible danger to a system, and therefor asks how AV softwares are defending against those. The question got quite a few useful answers that accepted the premise that there still IS a possible danger going out from quarantined files and explains how AV' softwares take this dangers into account and try to protect against them. And the it got marked as duplicate of a question asking for "Can malware be dangerous even when quarantined?" Where the accepted answer just says "No" What is even a contradiction to my question.

So why asking "How AV softwares make sure quarantined files never get executed?" is the same as asking "Can malware be dangerous even when quarantined?"

1

Firstly, the accepted answer has a "no" but then goes on to give lots more info.

Secondly, there are a few answers there giving detail around how quarantines are protected.

Coming at this independently, I am happy that your question is broadly a dupe of the existing one and has answers there. I'm trying to see if it is worthwhile merging to add the answers on your one into the existing one.

Thirdly, "mocks"? I can't see how to interpret that. Also, your question is a year old - not sure why you are revisiting it now.

  • Well, I reread the answers and while the answers on my post where totally satisfying the technical field of view which I had been asking for. I really hadn't accepted the answers to that question since even the "detail" you are talking about is just giving an imaginable picture of what is going on and that it is only getting dangerous if you "let the zombie out of the cage" While still my question is about HOW AV's protect agains those files. Not if they get dangerous if I turn of my AV. I explained in the mainsite OP quite detailed why I think wihtout special treatment even encoded files.... – Zaibis Jun 19 '17 at 8:46
  • might pos a danger and thats the main difference, which is actually even a contradiction to that claimed dupe. Since even disagree with the premise of that question. – Zaibis Jun 19 '17 at 8:48
  • I'm not sure what that comment means at all, I'm afraid. The community did vote to close as a dupe, and I have to say I agree. You could edit and see whether enough people want to reopen if you wanted. – Rory Alsop Jun 19 '17 at 8:48
  • I did vote for it. Hm, sad that I can't express it more understandable, sorry for that. Regarding merging... do what you think is best, but fmpov that would deface the answers since (and thats my point why I claim tis not a dupe) the premise of my OP and the other OP have a contradicting premise in it. therefor just merging now even the answers would simply change the meaning of all the answers since the are phrased to answer something different. – Zaibis Jun 19 '17 at 8:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .