The Scorpion

Just to be sure - so now in 'Ports used' we should have '443, 0-65535' ?

am_dew Here's what I did... Go into Eset 'set up' then 'advanced setup' (bottom right) Select 'Web access protection' then expand 'Web Protocols' In 'ports used by https protocol' delete '0-65535' leaving '443'.

Thanks

I've returned the SSL/TSL filtering to 'automatic' and deleted the '0-65535' so that 443 remains alone and chromecast is now recognised. So, is it considered ok to leave it like that or should the '0-65535' only be deleted when you want to cast and re-entered at other times? If so seems a problem that needs fixing by Eset. 😐

I've selected 'interactive mode' but no filter queries ever come up for 'Chromecast' even when I select 'cast'. There are dozens of 'google chrome' hits while on various sites but nothing mentioning chromecast ever appears. Anyone know how to force a filter query for chromecast?

Ok. Thanks

I went into 'List of SSL/TLS filtered applications' selected C:\Program Files(86)\Google\Chrome\application\chrome.exe and then selected 'ignore'.

Thanks for the input Itman. I've just disabled Eset's SSL/TLS protocol scanning Google\Chrome\Application\chrome.exe and my Chromecast is now recognised. ☺️ Looks like that may be the problem. Is leaving this disabled likely to cause any problems or major vulnerabilities?

Marcos, Itman, Thanks for replies. I think the problem has started with the latest version. Tried all the suggestions but the problem remains. (Itman, the chromecast was not listed as blocked)

I have recently installed version 12.2.23.0 of Eset Security. After installing it I could not connect with my Google Chromecast device. ('no device found' error message when casting) If I uninstall Eset I can connect no problem. I contacted Chromecast and was told that I was the 4th person in the last few days to have experienced this problem when using Eset. I've tried reinstalling Eset but the problem continues. So Eset may be a no go if there is no fix. Is Eset aware of this and is there a fix for this?

Thanks for the reply. BPP seems to disregard whichever browser I am in and just opens in IE. If I'm using Firefox at the time it will open using IE. If I'm using Chrome at the time it will open using IE. If I have no browser open it opens IE and uses that. So how do I stop it using IE every time?

When I use Eset Banking & Payment Protection it always opens using Internet Explorer which is a browser I have installed on my pc but seldom use and do not prefer. IE is not my default browser. Will Eset Banking & Payment only work with IE? Can I get it to open using a preferred or default browser?

Guess I'm unlucky then. 10 won't install on my XP pc. Eset has this to say... hxxp://support.eset.com/kb3507/?viewlocale=en_US

Marcos, v10 won't work on XP that's why I've installed v9. It wouldn't install on my XP and I then saw that the Eset site said they no longer supported XP after v9 and suggested installing 9 if necessary.

Thanks for the reply peteyt. My small emachines (second laptop) only has XP so I was looking for an AV that would give some protection on it. Not worth the expense of upgrading the system - even if it was capable of upgrade. So was wondering if Eset's version 9 is weaker 'protection-wise' than the later versions of Eset when it comes to virus protection on XP.

I note that versions 10 onwards do not support Windows XP. But version 9 will run on XP and loads newest virus sig's but doesn't do a 'product' update to v10. So, would my XP computer be protected ok with the 9.0.386.0 version or would it be missing something of importance? Thanks for any info.

OK. Thanks cyberhash.

I'm using Smart Security 10.0.390 Would there be a marked disadvantage in protection if the 'advanced heuristics/dna signatures' function is disabled? I've heard somewhere that disabling this can help increase system speeds. Is this advisable?

OK. Thanks. Will leave settings in 'Interactive mode'.

Maybe I'm not fully understanding how a 'leak test' operates! I thought a leak test simulated the behaviour of a trojan or suchlike that attempts to access the internet. That being so (if that's correct!) then I thought a firewall would automatically block it or automatically give a warning as you would not necessarily know beforehand that you had a 'nasty' on your pc. So maybe that's not the case then and you can't leave the Eset firewall setting on 'Automatic' but have to set Eset settings to 'Interactive' and then give permission or not to everything that pops up. So the 'Automatic' option should be ignored?

Thanks for the reply. Not quite sure what you mean - surely if I create a rule in eset that 'allows' connection to GRC it will defeat the purpose of the test? Like if the rule is to 'allow' then it will. If the rule is 'deny' then it won't. Eset gave no warning at all of the test when I ran the test so as to let me deny or allow it. Sorry if I'm missing something here!

Ran the Gibson Research Leak test and the personal firewall failed and allowed a connection. So... is the Eset firewall reliable or should I use a standalone firewall? Thanks for any advice. (just tried the Atelier firewall tests (6) and it apparently failed them too)

Thanks for the reply Tom. Guess I'll leave as is then.

I note that my Windows 8 firewall is 'being managed by Eset SmartSecurity'. Does this mean that the Windows firewall is completely deactivated? Also, the Eset Personal firewall setting is at 'automatic'. Is this adequate? Or should I select 'Learning' or 'Interactive' ? Thanks for any advice.