Duplicate problem

[dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg]

Hi,

since the abysmal customer service in Brazil was too stupid to even understand my question and closed my ticket right away, after copying and pasting standard text without relevance, let me try here:

I have a problem with the duplicate removal feature. It presents me a long list of duplicates, but the files are not identical, not even the file names. Maybe Kaspersky does not compare the files sufficiently.

I will annex a screenshot of one such case:

And since I have little time and can't go through that long list one by one, I had to turn the feature off.

[Flood and Flood's wife]

4 minutes ago, dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg said:

since the abysmal customer service in Brazil was too stupid to even understand my question and closed my ticket right away, after copying and pasting standard text without relevance, let me try here:

I have a problem with the duplicate removal feature. It presents me a long list of duplicates, but the files are not identical, not even the file names. Maybe Kaspersky does not compare the files sufficiently.

And since I have little time and can't go through that long list one by one, I had to turn the feature off.

Hello @dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg, 

Welcome!

It's sounds as if you've had an unsatisfactory experience seeking support for the issue. 

1. Please share the Incident reference number, prefixed with INC000? 

Thank you🙏
Flood🐳+🐋

[Schulte]

Hello @dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg,

in addition to the recommendation of @Flood and Flood's wife:

With an 'All in 1 Driver' it would be quite possible that both x86 and x64 drivers are included in one installer. This is also the case with Kaspersky.
Can you compare a hash of the two files?
They are probably identical...

[dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg]

4 hours ago, Flood and Flood's wife said:

Hello @dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg, 

Welcome!

It's sounds as if you've had an unsatisfactory experience seeking support for the issue. 

1. Please share the Incident reference number, prefixed with INC000? 

Thank you🙏
Flood🐳+🐋

Hi Flood,

It was INC000015909665

 

 

[dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg]

4 hours ago, Flood and Flood's wife said:

Hello @dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg, 

Welcome!

It's sounds as if you've had an unsatisfactory experience seeking support for the issue. 

1. Please share the Incident reference number, prefixed with INC000? 

Thank you🙏
Flood🐳+🐋

Hi Flood,

It was INC000015909665

Edited November 22, 2023 by dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg

[dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg]

4 hours ago, Schulte said:

Hello @dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg,

in addition to the recommendation of @Flood and Flood's wife:

With an 'All in 1 Driver' it would be quite possible that both x86 and x64 drivers are included in one installer. This is also the case with Kaspersky.
Can you compare a hash of the two files?
They are probably identical...

Hello Schulte,

I don't know about hashes.

I assume it is two different files, why else would they be present twice with a slightly different name? I can hardly take the x64 file and install it on an x86 operating system.

To me the term 'duplicate' means absolutely identical and hence redundant.

[dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg]

Gee, this forum software is confusing, so slow, timeouts...

Somehow I accidentally replied the same thing twice.

I have been on various message boards for decades, but this is bad.

[Schulte]

10 hours ago, dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg said:

I assume it is two different files, why else would they be present twice with a slightly different name?

Hello @dkjhjgskjgkhskjhg,

the file name is the same for both files (can't quite see it) but it could be 'xampp_install.exe'. The two are just stored in different folders. Also the size seems to be identical. And even if they were different names: if the hash matches, they are identical. You can also rename a file without changing the content.

A hash is a kind of checksum of a file. The best known are 'MD5' and 'SHA1'.
There are various tools for displaying a hash, but I would not like to recommend one directly here.
Windows also offers a possibility with 'certutil -hashfile <file> MD5' or 'certutil -hashfile <file> SHA1'.

I can't imagine that your Kaspersky has made a mistake here.