Looking For nVidia GPU Miner + Clean DL

I am looking for a good NVidia miner that doesn’t give a virus threat alert when I DL it. I have tried a couple recommendations but either Google wont let me DL and says it has a virus or Avast aborts the connection due to detecting Win32:Evo-Gen infection :scream: . I have read others say to ignore it but then I think NiceHash and what happened there.

So far Open CL has downloaded without issue. I have DL’d Claymore and Genoil but don’t see they work with NVidia. Is this correct?

Any suggestions?

Are you familiar with how to disable your antivirus, create a non scannable folder and Use a browser that allows you to download what you want? If you don’t This link will give you the tools and information to find out how.

EWBF and DSTM are your two options if you want to mine Zcash with Nvidia. If you are downloading them from bitcointalk.org, they are safe,

1 Like

Why do I need to disable my antivirus? No offense but that sounds like the dumbest idea in todays world. I have heard that its because of a bat file… because its a zip file… all sorts of reasons I should ignore the warning but no real proof of it. Just a group consensus against AV scanners results. That’s like taking life advice from my FB feed.

Just because its on bitcointalk menas its safe… why, they are foolproof? That’s silly.

I am not trying to be rude but if S/W is setting of AV alerts then its either a very well disguised virus everyone is ignoring over greed or bad programming; which then leads to compromising a system due the bad programming. Some of the links get shut down by Avast all due to being redirected to and the infection being detected on a port comm from the redirect attempt.

Maybe its time we start questioning more here. Just sayn.

With that said, how can I honestly know they are safe when both Google and my AV are saying don’t do it? Why just because they are one site does that mean they are safe?

Just because the possible exploit in the S/W hasn’t been used doesn’t mean its not there.

For example, this happened when I installed the ZCash4Win wallet but my AV looked at the files and the next day I got a notification they scanned it and found it safe. I don’t get anything like that with these DL’s and both of those you state give the biggest alerts.

Questions like this are a very valid thing to ask. I hope you can understand.

I tried one DL of ccMiner from bitcointalk and got the same thing yet I found the actual devs GitHub page and it didn’t give me one issue. That right there is saying a lot. It also works with NVidia and equihash for zCash. It even has config readme for my mining pool for zcash. So obviously there are more options.

I attempted to help you, but you seem to already know the answers…

Good luck


My apologies for the excessive rant. It was a little out of line.

Yet the example I posted of finding one location of ccMiner that sets off viral alerts while another (directly from the actual developers GitHub) does not, specifies there is a problem. That attachments and illicit miners are being distributed.

Also, the help I am looking for, as well, is for a clean download. This means where I wont end up getting a viral alert that is not a verified ‘false positive’ by my AV scanner. That is specific in the title so, while your suggestion are a thing I could do they do not fit the what my question was.

I appreciate your effort to assist but I am concerned about security as well you should be too. The hack on NiceHash wasn’t an actual hack on system but a ‘profiling’ attack where they gained access through an engineers credentials. This can happen against the rest of us if we disregard the basics of security. By downloading programs that should not require me to disable my AV but create the situation where we do… well, that should spell itself out.

Now, I will restate my question to anyone who reads this:

I am looking for all NVidia GPU Miners that have a clean download. If you know of them, please let me know.

@CitricAcid I have not found the download link for DSTM and am more than willing to check it out if you can provide me with it. Thank you :smiley:

wallets will do the same thing. I thought it was because of the crypto portion. Nicehash sets off every alarm on the planet because it has multi miners inside it.

I dont know the answer. I am using Zec Miner 0.3.4b and it does not set off my AV.

Joe… I think I’ll call you Joe… You seem like an average Joe

Joe, about NiceHash… Under every definition in the I.T. world what happened to NiceHash was a hack. If someone gains illegal access to your system, by whatever means (brute force, digging in the trash, phishing, guess your password by profiling), they have hacked / cracked your security and have non unauthorized entry.

I have told you it is a false positive, everyone on the bitcointalk.org will tell you its a false positive, everyone that mines ANY COIN will tell you it is a false positive.

Until you read the things I give you to help you, I don’t think it is possible for me to help you Joe.
I’m going to post it again just like I did when I said good luck to you.
If you click on this link Joe, Common Questions and Answers and then click on Best Miners, it’ll provide you information on the three top miners for what ever your GPU is.
In fact there is a lot of good information there that someone has taken the time to write and update, just to help.

1 Like

I read all about what others tell us are ‘false positives’ but no one has posted any screenshot showing results from an official AV company testing.

As far as the NiceHash, it was a hack but there is a difference in the style of hacking. Profiling hacks are not a compromise of the security of the S/W itself. This makes a yuuge difference to how trustworthy the company and its software are. This is nothing like the actual code hacking on a few exchanges in the past couple months. Also…

…an my name is not Joe :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

OMG man… your words " NiceHash wasn’t an actual hack "

Then these are your words “It was a hack but there is a differenc in the style of hacking”

You’re that guy in the a group conversation when someone says hey what is the answer to such and such, someone gives an answer, then you join in and say no that it isn’t the answer. I don’t know the answer but I know that isn’t the answer. You’re that guy

okay, your name isn’t Joe

If there lead engineer was stupid enough for his password to be guessed by a profile attack and they did not have basic 2 step authentication on their critical systems, yes it is a sign of a not so trustworthy company. They have idiots working for them and the CIO deserves to be fired for not having basic best practice standards implemented.

1 Like

Okay… Those in the industry DO NOT consider a profiling hack an actual hack as all they did was illicit information through another means. They did no modification of coding or DDoSing or other similar methods to obtain the info. Being clever enough to get someones password by profiling is NOT hacking the system, just the person you get it from. Therefore, its not really a hack, but I relented just for you.

Now I feel Im being trolled by someone against NH. I just told you it WAS a hack, just a different type than a SW hack. Please read my comments carefully or just stop responding to flame the situation.

Thanks… bye now.

somehow, all those wallet company said being hacked… but is that the real case??
I wonder…

They seems no need to take any responsibility…


I am not trolling you… You brought up NiceHash out of nowhere, you seemed misinformed and I wanted to attempt to give you the truth/facts.

Again your words "The hack on NiceHash wasn’t an actual hack on system but a ‘profiling’ attack where they gained access through an engineers credentials. "

Then again your words “As far as the NiceHash, it was a hack but there is a difference in the style of hacking. Profiling hacks are not a compromise of the security of the S/W itself.”

First you say it wasn’t a hack it was a profile attack, then when I counter your post now its is a hack just a different type of hack.

Lets be very clear about this: If a person can gain unauthorized access to any software, no matter how it was obtained, then there is a security problem and it is considered by the term hack. If the software, that deals in currency in the millions didn’t require an authenticator that passcode changes every 30 to 60 seconds, didn’t require a changing the master password every 30 to 60 days with rules in place that it be a minimum of 18 alpha numberic charactor upper case with requirements with no more than 3 of each at a time, then they have a software/security problem.

I am in the industry, I have been for several decades. I have certifications that don’t exist anymore, security clearances that allow me access to secure DHS secured server rooms. I receive daily threat assessments from the HLS and DOD about potential internet, network, and security threats. blah blah blah…
I know the word, meaning, and definition of the term “Hack” and how it has evolved over the last 30+ years.
There are always those in some industry who don’t consider something; there are those who even today think the earth is flat, but I digress.

I will heed your advice and this will be the last reply from me to any thread where you are inquiring information.

I do wish you the best of luck and I hope you learn a lot here in the forums

Good luck and happy holidays

1 Like

If you don’t understand why basic antivirus software flags ewbf for windows as a malicious file, you wont be able to convince yourself or anyone else why it is “clean”.

To address the OP -
Find an open source miner on github, review the code, and compile it yourself. That’s about the only guarantee you are going to get that something is “Clean”.
And yet, even then you will be left with an executable being created that does certain things an antivirus would not like - and it will be quarantined.

1 Like

Great news @CitricAcid! I found a clean DL of EWBF from Nanopool.org! I know my view on security is a little tighter than some but so far in my life it has paid off well. I don’t know why the one from bitcointalk gives my AV heartache but it does. Anyhow, I am glad that I have found a clean download that didn’t set off any bells. If you want to have a rpviate discussion of the NiceHash ordeal, I would be happy to talk offline or something so as not to clog this thread with info its not about.

@Kahooli What I meant by looking for a clean download was one that doesn’t end up setting off any virus alerts when I DL it. I have found a few and some of them on one site will give off an alert and other sites wont (for the same program). Don’t know exactly why but that’s just what I have been encountering.

Anyhow, I will post some of the DL links that are not giving any issues whe DL’ing so anyone else with this issue can get something they can feel good with.

  1. EWBF and DSTM are the best CUDA miner RIGHT NOW.
  2. Download EWBF and DSTM from author’s thread on https://bitcointalk.org is safe.
  3. After downloaded, check the hashes of files.

Though EWBF can disable devfee from commandline, but it always crash and can not restart properly. So i change to DSTM, it is faster and more stable.

@y4sha Strange… I went the developers GitHub instead and got a clean download. The one’s on bitcointalk are the ones that always set my AV off for what should be the same file. Thank about it.

Me… Ill stick to the GitHub that doesn’t give me any alert. I found the GitHub for EWBF and it is was a clean download there, not on bitcointalk though.

I don’t mind paying a dev fee as I couldn’t write one myself right now. I am also looking into Excavator but am having issues writing the command line and the available GUI doesn’t let me specify my worker on my pool

Being proud of downloading a software that is not from the author’s link posted on bitcointalk is plain ignorant.

Not saying that nanopools files are not legit, but the way you prefer downloading it from somewhere else only because your browser doesn’t flag it as unsafe is bad practice.


When I first downloaded it, Malwarebytes told me that it was a virus because it was a “bitcoin miner”. Obviously it can’t tell the difference between a program that allows mining for crypto-currencies, and one that automatically mines it without your knowledge.

1 Like

Actually the link went to the authors actual GitHub. The REAL developer, not some one posing on bitcointalk giving links to a Google doc account or a file sharing site. Anyone question why those ‘developer’ links on bitcointalk aren’t to real GitHub files with full version history and notes?

I think you should re-read my posts. I got to the link from nanopool which went to the ACTUAL AUTHORS valid GitHub site with full version histories and notes. I trust a GitHub DL more than some various GoogleDoc link or some random filesharing site, but hey that’s just me :smiley:.