Azure Phoenix
-
Posts
50 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Azure Phoenix
-
-
On 10/26/2019 at 12:25 PM, Marcos said:
We will investigate it on Monday. I was able to reproduce it.
So, what happened? Is the issue going to get fixed?
-
10 hours ago, novice said:
I remember an antivirus ( do not recall which) asking for CAPTCHA in order to proceed with uninstall.
A simple and elegant solution.
Only recall Webroot doing this.
-
Since no one has replied here. Try going to the appropriate sub-forum for your device and see if anyone has the same issue you do.
https://forum.eset.com/forum/28-eset-products-for-mobile-devices/
-
On 6/25/2019 at 3:16 PM, Sammo said:
Not working at all.
Did you checked if uBlock isn't blocking part of the website? Perhaps that's the reason why ESET isn't detecting phishing there.
-
Have you tried installing the home version of ESET instead of endpoint?
-
On 6/7/2019 at 10:56 AM, itman said:
In other words, the new Edge browers will employ the same security features as the old Edge browser.
Does this mean features like banking don't work on Edge? I remember the feature always worked with Chrome despite enabling appcontainer in it.
Though, I wonder if the banking feature was changing the Chrome process to untrusted.
-
7 minutes ago, tecknomage said:
I already know about ESET for Android, I am asking why no ESET for iPhone.
From the link TomFace posted
23. Why is there no ESET product available for Windows Phone and Apple iOS (iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch)?
Windows Phone and Apple iOS are proprietary operating systems with their own application stores. The only way to install software on your device is through these stores. Publishers verify each application and guarantee it is malware free. The applications from these stores cannot be run in the background, nor can they scan and delete other programs. Additionally, each application runs in its own segment– a sandbox–so that even if there is any malware bundled in with an application, it cannot be installed and spread to other programs.
-
Perhaps a good alternative for those wanting MBAM web protection, would be its extension for Chrome and Firefox.
would assume those won't conflict with ESET.
-
11 hours ago, Marcos said:
Exclusions should be used with utter care and used only to resolve specific issues that could not be solved other way with the assistance of customer care. Each exclusion creates a security hole since excluded paths will never be scanned by ESET and possible malware won't be detected even if was otherwise detected and blocked.
Exclusions are a function in your product. Those possibles security holes are already there. So, why not improve the way exclusions are done like above?
-
You can also try alternatives. For example qBittorent.
-
51 minutes ago, esset said:
It's a really good product. I have noticed you are updating the modules in a way you didn't in the past, or possibly that's my perception. The product internet security has many features.
However, it would be nice to have a new and additional feature that really adds to the protection. Perhaps something like an AI feature, a bit heavy on resources so it should be optional. Or maybe a shielded 'session' (phrase?) for one's browsing experience, that keeps one's browsing activity separate from the rest of the system. Often people just want to read the content of websites without doing anything, and I'd guess any malware encountered that way could be kept contained if there is a feature for that.
Again, maybe optional because not everyone has a system with the resources for more demanding tasks.
Possibly add an antispam feature for Thunderbird ? Personally I'm on version 5.
ESET already has machine learning. It's called Augur
https://www.welivesecurity.com/2017/06/20/machine-learning-eset-road-augur/
They already did many articles of the subject of ML.
-
Malwaretips offer a Malware Hub section where users spent time testing security products.
As far as I'm aware one of the rules there is to submit missed samples to the antivirus provider you are testing.
Of course one has to wait for someone to actually test ESET.
-
I assume this might have something to do with DNA signature
https://www.eset.com/int/about/technology/
"Detection types range from very specific hashes to ESET DNA Detections, which are complex definitions of malicious behavior and malware characteristics."
-
6 hours ago, galaxy said:
This innovation was not listed in any change
That's why the title says 'under the hood'
-
2 hours ago, cyberhash said:
You added that to the "exclude from scanning" list yeah ??
Using the format *www.sportshd.me* , using those asterisks
Thought websites had to be excluded like this www.sportshd.me/*
-
On 9/9/2018 at 9:44 AM, billyboy12 said:
I was using uBlock Origin previously, but it didn't seem to help. Site seems to work now, so it seems like something has been changed that has corrected whatever the problem NOD32 was having.
Try uBlock with dynamic filtering. And try to block the ads on all websites.
-
Isn't that the job of the HIPS?
-
17 minutes ago, TomFace said:
Camelia, you may want to review the BPP use via this KB. While it does not get into the technical aspects of BPP, it's a good review. I do not know if BPP uses it's own sandbox, so Azure Phoenix may have a leg up on me.
One thing I do know is that it works well with my PW manager LastPass v4.1.48 which is a Godsend for me.
https://support.eset.com/KB5657/?locale=en_EN&segment=home
The fact it says "secured environment" makes me think of a sandbox. @Marcos can correct me if I'm wrong.
-
You mean the banking feature? I thought it already used its own sandbox.
-
If one uses a security product, it is understandable to want to know if it works and how. Safe habits plus knowing the strength and weaknesses(limitations) of a product is good.
3 hours ago, galaxy said:Norton has also completely failed with the test
Do you know if Norton is injecting dll into processes to monitor them?
-
One thing I have noticed from dedicated anti-exploit products is that they inject dll into various processes most likely to monitor their behavior for possible exploitation. However if one checks with Process Explorer you hardly see any dll from ESET. At most, you can see dll in browsers like Chrome and Firefox but those are for the Banking feature.
So, I'm going to assume to whatever technology ESET uses for its anti-exploit capabilities are different from the standard.
-
12 hours ago, novice said:
Used the above mentioned test to see ESET antiexploit capabilities; ZERO reaction from ESET.
Now I know I will get "we know that is a test, that's why!!!"
So, is there any test on the internet which can be used to test ESET capabilities (other than EICAR)????
I'm curious. Did you used a 32-bit application for the test? If so, could you say which one?
-
3 hours ago, Marcos said:
As for HIPS rules, wildcards are not supported.
I believe you meant firewall rules. HIPS supports wildcards, the firewall doesn't.
-
2 hours ago, Marcos said:
There are no such short-term plans.
What about Gryphon? Is it true it uses technology from ESET?
Discussion about the product
https://malwaretips.com/threads/gryphon-the-worlds-most-powerful-ai-router.85278/
ESET 13 Anti-theft: no phantom account alert
in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium
Posted
I see.Thanks.