0001664: Sumo "Ignores" extra item - MantisBT

MantisBT

View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ]

[ Issue History ] [ Print ]

ID

Project

Category

View Status

Date Submitted

Last Update

0001664

SUMo

Bug

public

2012-08-07 23:59

2012-08-13 13:12

Reporter

randolindso0

Assigned To

Kyle_Katarn

Priority

high

Severity

major

Reproducibility

always

Status

acknowledged

Resolution

open

Platform

Windows

OS

xp

OS Version

sp3

Product Version

3.4

Target Version

Fixed in Version

Summary

0001664: Sumo "Ignores" extra item

Description

I have a
> program installed called System Explorer, by Mister Group, and when
> doing a "Scan" of my computer with SUMO it brings up three entries for
> System Explorer. One is a 64 System Explorer entry- my system is 32
> so I chose to "Ignore" that in SUMO- which it does. It also brings up
> System Explorer Service.exe, which I also choose to "Ignore", and
> lastly System Explorer.exe, which I would like SUMO to not "Ignore."
> Problem is, when I choose "Ignore" System Explorer Service.exe" then
> the next "Scan" also ignores the program exe along with the service
> exe.

Steps To Reproduce

see above

Additional Information

see above

Tags

No tags attached.

Doc1.docx [^] (86,399 bytes) 2012-08-07 23:59

Relationships

related to

acknowledged

It shall be possible to ignore a file path in addition to product / company

Notes
(0001037) Kyle_Katarn (administrator) 2012-08-08 00:05	Ignore function should take file title into account.

(0001047) bytehead (updater) 2012-08-08 15:56 edited on: 2012-08-13 13:12	It still doesn't? :o Ouch! ;) Moreover, it should take into account full file name (with path), not just a title. Otherwise, if you choose to ignore some popular executable (e.g. 7z.exe, unrar.exe, etc.) bundled as a 3d party component in many packages, it could also affect all other locations, including its original standalone installation (e.g. %ProgramFiles%/7-zip, %ProgramFiles%/WinRAR, etc.). This is not desirable. Even though those components usually get updated together with encapsulating apps, in many cases one needs to address 3d party security issues immediately, not waiting for/relying on external devs do it for them. Thus, we need a fine grained control of what instances get ignored/updated in the list. I'm sure there're other valid use cases to justify it.

(0001053) Kyle_Katarn (administrator) 2012-08-08 21:38	You're perfectly right.

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2012-08-07 23:59	randolindso0	New Issue
2012-08-07 23:59	randolindso0	File Added: Doc1.docx
2012-08-08 00:05	Kyle_Katarn	Note Added: 0001037
2012-08-08 00:05	Kyle_Katarn	Assigned To	=> Kyle_Katarn
2012-08-08 00:05	Kyle_Katarn	Status	new => acknowledged
2012-08-08 09:51	Kyle_Katarn	Relationship added	related to 0001666
2012-08-08 15:56	bytehead	Relationship added	related to 0001656
2012-08-08 15:56	bytehead	Note Added: 0001047
2012-08-08 15:58	bytehead	Priority	normal => high
2012-08-08 15:58	bytehead	Severity	minor => major
2012-08-08 15:58	bytehead	Description Updated	View Revisions
2012-08-08 16:39	bytehead	Note Edited: 0001047	View Revisions
2012-08-08 16:53	bytehead	Note Edited: 0001047	View Revisions
2012-08-08 16:54	bytehead	Note Edited: 0001047	View Revisions
2012-08-08 16:55	bytehead	Note Edited: 0001047	View Revisions
2012-08-08 21:38	Kyle_Katarn	Note Added: 0001053
2012-08-12 00:03	Kyle_Katarn	Relationship deleted	related to 0001656
2012-08-13 13:12	bytehead	Note Edited: 0001047	View Revisions

MantisBT 1.2.15 [^]

Copyright © 2000 - 2013 MantisBT Team