Avast may detect install.sh
as infected by malware "BV:Downloader-Apk [Drp]". It's not.
#715
jasoncavinder
started this conversation in
General
Replies: 0 comments
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
TLDR: It's not malware. If you got here via Google, it's safe to "Create Exception".
While installing via
cargo install zoxide --locked
, Avast interrupted the install with an alert that read, "install.sh is infected with malware: BV:Downloader-Apk [Drp]". The file in question was:~/.cargo/registry/src/index.crates.io-6f17d22bba15001f/zoxide-0.9.3/install.sh
.I read the local script file that triggered the Avast File Shield alert and it 100% matches install.sh from this repo, so I'm 100% confident the script was not tampered with and that it is free from any malware, meaning that this is a false positive detection by Avast based on the combinations of curl, wget, tar, unzip, and local code/binary executions appearing similar in behavior to malicious scripts.
I'm posting this here to assuage any worries of anyone who might encounter this (or similar) alerts from antivirus software, and to ensure them that it's safe to create an exception with their AV to allow the install (at least as of my review today of version 0.9.3).
However, I do have some thoughts regarding how to minimize AV false positives, and thus avoid distrust by new users, if desired:
echo
line afterlocal _releases
to print information about the download before it happens. This may 'reassure' any antivirus software that the download is safe since it's being announced to the user with detailed information and from a trusted source before executing the download.release.yml
to include checksum generation and include a checksum.txt for each release. Modifyinstall.sh
to also downloadchecksum.txt
and verify. Inclusion of security checks like this in the install script may lower the potential for false positives by antivirus heuristics.install.sh
to also download the appropriate.asc
and verify the signature (or fall back to basic checksum verification if the user's system isn't configured for verifying GPG). Additional security steps like this should further lessen the likelihood of AV false positives.I did not create an issue for this, since it's possible that this issue is adequately addressed by my false positive report to Avast and by this discussion post getting indexed into Google/Bing/etc. In that case, I don't want to bother the maintainer(s) with a non-issue. However, if further discussion indicates that this should be addressed, then I'd be willing to open an issue, implement any suggestions, and create a PR. Cheers.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions