novice

Well,see here: The OP mentioned : "ESET is installed and updated with recent update on the server "

Don't worry, I got a warning already , so most likely I will be banned. This is the new way of hiding the truth.

If you use Win XP/7/10, Microsoft is already spying on you , so you have nothing to loose using MSE Bitdefender free has absolutely no nags/ advertisings. Most of third party testing entities would disagree with you, but hey... if you like it is fine. On the end of the day the truth remains: for the last 14 months ESET is behind MSE in all major tests; as a result ESET decided to quit from AVTest. The "real life" story doesn't hold water; for a regular person , in real life, the Earth is flat . However , scientists spent time and effort to prove that the Earth is round. Hard to believe, in "real life" seems to be flat. And here ends the ESET "real life "saga.

So, if in "real life" the situation is different, what is the point of ESET participating in AV Comparatives???? Remove ESET from AV Comparatives ( ESET already doesn't participate in AV Test any longer ) and continue to promote the "real life" story. This may be, but I paid $120 for Win 7 10 years ago and I have free MSE . For the same period I would have paid $590 for ESET. Bitdefender free doesn't display any adds and the settings are just right for a regular user.

ESET 99.1% 3FP $59.99/year MSE 100% 5FP $0/year AVIRA 100% 0FP $0/year https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/real-world-protection-test-may-2018-factsheet/

By default HIPS doesn't run in interactive mode, so the malware execution would have been NOT detected. the mechanism involved in detection should be transparent for the user ; explanations like "it would have to" ," if HIPS was running in Interactive mode", "would have been detected" prove once more time the infinitesimal probability that ESET would detect the particular malware in NORMAL CONDITIONS. At the same time we had 10 from 50 antiviruses which detected (I do not care how) , the sample at first view. After 8 hours and a posting on the forum ESET added the detection. The OP summarized very well the situation :

How is this relevant???? If there are mechanisms in place to detect it as a "zero day", then should be detected in first second. After is posted on VT , anyone can issue a signature based on MD5.

If even Microsoft detects it as "Trojan:Win32/Fuery.B!cl" , this raises big question marks about ESET capabilities. I respectfully disagree. It is impossible to detect a "Zero day" as a malware with a name , so the key is to be detected heuristically / generically without update; this is the generally accepted idea , and the trend today. If ESET bases the detection only on signatures will always be behind....And that may explain the poor result in AVTest /AV Comparatives.

So basically in default mode ESET firewall behaves like Windows firewall.

Seriously? What is a typical name for a malware? And, a typical malware is crafted to be detected? What would you expect, a malware with name virus.exe?

Exactly! Usually I cancel this scan, but this time I was busy An ESET finished the scan, scanning all my "Test" folders. 36 "potentially unwanted" were found, unfortunately I really want to keep them. Back to the subject in hand , I do not like the philosophy "You don't have to care what action was exactly performed". In fact I DO CARE very much about what action was exactly performed; that' why I spend time to set "Threat sense" in a hundred places. If a file was "disinfected" I would rather install it again as new, rather than having a "disinfected" one. So, if this is the idea, why not having a big red button on the end of the scan with a "FIX ALL" message????

Somebody who wants ESET because is highly customizable ( I count more than 120 parameters) most likely is interested to know WHAT EXACTELY HAS BEEN DONE.

Cleaning means "any" of 1,2,3 or all of them at the same time ?? In 2, there is "deleting the whole malicious file or cleaning the malicious code ... or sanitizing the file " . How an user is supposed to know which "or" happened? Wouldn't be more logical to know EXACTELY what happened????

Kaspersky, Avira, BitDefender and TrendMicro are consistently on top of 99.9% (most of the time 100%) There is no tweak which can improve security without affecting something else (like FP)

Did a full computer scan and the final message is : Threads found 36 (Cleaned :All) So , in fact what happened? 1. all 36 threads were cleaned , the "malware component" has been removed and the files are still in place OR 2. all 36 threads were deleted permanently OR 3. all 36 threads were moved to Quarantine Wouldn't be much easier to have some sort of explanation ? Example: Threads found 36 (Deleted 6 ; Cleaned 22: Moved to Quarantine 8)

You are right about ESET having the lowest system impact, I ca feel it . It is disappointing though to see ESET not participating anymore in AVTest, in order to avoid criticism. I doubt Microsoft has a dedicated team to pass AV test or AV comparatives.

Answer from "Suport": "If you're attempting to activate ESET NOD32 Antivirus Version 8, you will need to use your username and password instead of your license key. Whatever I buy today, has only licence key.

OK then, that means 23 from 66 antiviruses on Virus Total must be stupid to classify this as "Trojan" when in fact doesn't pose any security risk. Well done, ESET!

See what the OP is saying...

Most detection are " Trojan" or "Trojan something" Definition of Trojan (by Kaspersky): A Trojan horse or Trojan is a type of malware that is often disguised as legitimate software. Trojans can be employed by cyber-thieves and hackers trying to gain access to users' systems. Users are typically tricked by some form of social engineering into loading and executing Trojans on their systems. Once activated, Trojans can enable cyber-criminals to spy on you, steal your sensitive data, and gain backdoor access to your system. These actions can include: Deleting data Blocking data Modifying data Copying data Disrupting the performance of computers or computer networks I do not understand how ESET classifies this as "unsafe application" which doesn't pose any security risk......

AV Test : Protection against 0-day ..................228 samples Detection of widespread and prevalent malware discovered in the last 4 weeks ..............4877 samples So it is not about 400 samples, is more about 4000 samples from the last 4 weeks; the samples are the same for each and every AV tested, so why ESET doesn't perform better? It is not like they will test ESET with a set of "difficult" samples and the rest of them with "regular" samples.

Out of curiosity! Compared with MSE , ESET seems to be over sophisticated, with literally hundreds of settings, shields, adjustments, etc. Somehow I hopped that , with sophistication , performance will come, but in the last 12 months (or more) ESET performed in the second league in AV Test and AV Comparatives. Moreover, recently ESET is no longer in AV Test. Compared with ESET, MSE seems to be a skeleton of antivirus, yet in the last year performed better and better, with the recent result of 100% (some user dependent) And is free. That's why.

... in latest AV Comparatives /April 2018. https://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php MSE free, 100%. And everyone insists to update to the latest v11, which offers greater protection....

This will /may happen 7 months from now: as of today , v8 is up and running. The last I checked , v11 did not perform better in AV Test / AV Comparatives compared with v8, so the OP may have a legitimate desire in using v8. PS: I would use v8 myself, unfortunately I cannot activate it anymore.

End of this year is in 7 months ; till then V8 is as good as new and is supposed to have basic support as mentioned here: https://support.eset.com/kb3678/#eis It is up to the paying user to decide how to use the product; it is possible the user uses a different software to protect against Ransomware, doesn't have UEFI , etc. Think about having a 2 years old Ford, and each morning you find a sticker on your car, from Ford company asking you to get the latest model, which is better. ESET either has to stop supporting old version or has to stop nagging paying customers with older, still supported versions. Is that simple.