>Hi Mike,
>
>>We have found Boxeapp applications under certain conditions the antivirus deletes the EXE with a false positive error.
>
>Thanks for your contribution to the thread:-)
>
>It looks like most virtualizers produce this kind of side effects ie "false positive" at times on various antivirus. Molebox, which we used successfully, was famous for this. But that did not stop us from using it though.
>
>The tests I made yesterday and to-day were very positive with Boxedapp. But, yep, some antivirus-es reacted rather badly to the boxedapp applications samples that we produced. I intend to mitigate that with "code signing". Which I never did practice. We'll have a test and I just hope it will help. I'd be glad to hear whether we can expect some improvement with "code signing" or not?
>
>By the way, I've seen you are quite aware of code protection issues. We bundle a defoxed app with BoxedApp. It works fine. But of course BoxedApp is a plain virtualizer. Not a code protector. Do you know or assume whether refox-protected code could be boxedApp-ed nicely as well?
>
>Have a nice week-end by the way:-)
>
>Daniel

I have Refoxed application and BoxApped successfully yes.
Their is also Chen's "VFP10" compiler which ends taking some of the application and turns it into an FLL which makes it almost impossible to decompile.