Files are attached. Packed/encrypted files - e.g. for copy protected, to make cracking difficult - often cause virus scanners to raise
generic alarms. Sometimes even unpacked/unencrypted files, too. I looked into this program and it's not suspicious/sophisticated enough for a virus; you shouldn't worry about it.
As for virus alarms for no-CD patch vs. original file: original files are more often packed/encrypted against cracking and no-CD patches more often unpacked/unencrypted. However, if cracking was really difficult and/or the cracker is a bastard
, he'll repack/reencrypt the no-CD patch so noone can see the changes involved in cracking it. Then the no-CD patch is also likely to raise a general alarm in virus scanners. There's not much you can do about it.
I don't understand your comment about file sizes. Stripping copy protection may A) decrease the file size because encryption code has been removed and/or B) increase the file size because encryption is most often applied to an already packed file. No-CD patches are likely to be significantly larger, because of B), than original files. When I cleaned the executable in two ways, those programs thought differently about which parts of memory are used, this is why the resulting executables have different sizes.
There's not much point in requesting no-CD patches here because crackers don't visit this forum. (Well, a few do, so you may have a chance.)