👍 13.2 ModSelector (Hexed)

Then what is that?

abcexport.exe - Jotti's malware scan

It's one of the files from the .zip file from the OP. One of the scanners indicates a virus.

If you had really scanned the files, you would've got the same results.

Hence, if anyone says (and the OP said that) that he scanned each file individually, and got no detections, the guy is lying. It's that simple. Otherwise, I'd be able to do the same thing (scan each file individually) and get no detections for any of them.

Therefore, what the OP said, which is

is nothing but a lie. He's obviously trying to trick people into installing a trojan, and you're apparently here to help him.

Even if the detection is a false positive, which I doubt, the undeniable fact remains that the OP lied to us, and I find it very suspicious.

He didnt lie... Check your undeniable logic again
quote from him:
See the bolded word there. He never said HE checked every single file because he did not. Me and a nice guy named Netbiatch went through the files to see what the deal was. I also sent a report to Dr.WEB and had them check to see what is throwing the false positive.

Also if you think for two secs how would I even manage to attach a virus to a preexisting .exe that is not open source and manage have it still work for every single person... I would have to first decompile the exe probably very hard. add in a quick Trojan virus or whatever then recompile it as a binary again and make sure it is still working... If there was a virus it would be attached to the client where you type in your username or password, or as a hidden folder that I zipped up. Your reasoning makes no sense at all.

I am very curious about what is throwing the false positive as well and I will let you know what Dr.WEB says back to me about it.
In the future things could go like "Hey do you know why there is a detection on Dr.WEB? That seems weird, someone should check this out"

It doesn't matter who did the checking, what matters is that the results were misrepresented. He could've said something like "well, Dr. Web is indicating there's a trojan where there isn't one, so disregard it" but instead he said that there were no detections for any of the files scanned individually which is BS because there must've been a detection for one of the files which I've shown already.

Add to that the fact he said that the false positive was due to the file from the OP being an archive (lol!) and you have to admit it doesn't look very good. Whether there is a trojan here or not, the OP certainly made every effort possible (if involuntarily) to make it look like there is one indeed...

Please be daft elsewhere.

People ask me all the time "how come you never release stuff anymore?"

^^^^This guy

He isnt trying to hide anything.
he posted two virus scans both showing that Dr.WEB found a trojan.

---------- Post added at 12:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 PM ----------

You are an idiot. If you are paranoid. Saw that there was two detections.

Why on earth did you download the file and decompress it??
Makes no sense at all lol

Yes, he posted the scans and then said that the detection was due to the fact that the file had a .zip extension. A very interesting explanation, you have to admit.

And since you've asked: I obviously downloaded the file to my sandbox PC (that's what I do with any even remotely suspicious file), because I was curious to see what was going on. Turns out there isn't a whole lot to see here, but you never know until you see for yourself.

So rather that being like this, highly unproductive. You could have:
Hey guys I ran this on my sandbox PC to check to see whats up with this detection. It turns out there is not a whole lot to see here.
Thanks for spending 20+ hrs on this release OP

Look, I appreciate your work, OK? I probably wouldn't even bother doing the virus scans if it wasn't for the OP and his sketchy explanations. Why couldn't he just admit there's a false positive instead of trying to conceal it (by saying that scanned individually, none of the files showed anything suspicious) and/or blame it on something completely unrelated (such as the file being a .zip)?

Yeah, that's all it normally does... until someone modifies it in order to do a number of other things such as, I don't know, adding a little keylogger to my client perhaps?

Trusting a file just because its name is familiar doesn't sound like a very smart thing to do in 2013. Call me paranoid if you want.