On 27 July 2018 at 16:14, Zipper Fish via Boost
Paul, I already feel good and am not panicking, but thank you for your concern :-)
As you could have seen in the archive, quite a lot of people have looked at it, and found it to be not a problem. I am interested in the Windows 3rd party binaries because I try to avoid
building boost manually on Windows if at all possible. As you know, the Windows Zip file does not contain binaries for the non-header-only parts of boost.
You could use vcpkg and build boost (and many other libraries) without any fuss. I already gathered your strategy about using a separate partition to beat
the virus checkers from the archive link that Mateusz shared.
You can add excluded paths to Defender (and other AV's), add the build directories as well, it will speed up you build. As I wrote in my response to Mateusz, I am simply curious why a virus
checker would flag a false positive in compiled boost libraries.
It's an unsigned executable, the self extractor (tagged on at the end of the file) is possibly itself compressed. If that is done with upx, it will be flagged as a virus. There's an optimising exe compressor doing both 32- and 64-bit exe/dll's called mpress https://autohotkey.com/mpress/mpress_web.htm, this one will not get flagged (by my experience) ever. Is it because viruses use boost libraries? I've used quite a number of
libraries over the years and none that I can recall had this issue. (If this is off topic, my apologies.)
Before doing anything, check the suspicious file with malwarebytes https://www.malwarebytes.com/premium/ (just use the free version), if it is a problem, mb is very likely to find it. If you dare (and are allowed, i.e. you don't work for the potus), use kaspersky https://www.kaspersky.com/downloads/thank-you/free-virus-removal-tool, it *will* find it (and remove). degski -- *"If something cannot go on forever, it will stop" - Herbert Stein*