Jito463

First off, I managed to get everything working without the v6 installer, so ultimately it doesn't matter, though it certainly would have been easier with it. The network filter driver broke internet connectivity until I manually removed it and Eset, then reinstalled the latest build. However, just to clarify, it didn't have to get any module updates at all. I only needed it because I wanted to import a compatible version into MacOS 14, so I didn't have to jump through hoops (as reported above) to get Eset updated to the latest build. Apparently I didn't make that clear enough, or you're just so fixated on your own preconceptions that you failed to understand what I was trying to do.

That seems...shortsighted. There's no option for downloading an earlier version? I'm trying to get her up to v7, but that version doesn't work with her current MacOS version, so I need this as an interim build. I'm trying to understand why one version of CyberSecurity v6 would be available, but not both. It's a rather odd choice.

I work at a small computer store, and I'm attempting to migrate a customer from a 2012 iMac running MacOS 10.15.7 to a newer 2019 iMac running MacOS 14.4.2. The computer currently has CyberSecurity v6.8.300.0. Before I migrate, I wanted to upgrade Eset as much as I can to avoid conflicts afterwards. I tried v7, but apparently - despite no mention of it in the changelog - support has been dropped for 10.15. I found that v6.11 would work with both, but the 2012 iMac isn't offering to download any newer version than v6.8, and I cannot locate the v6.11 installer on your website. Oddly enough, I did manage to find a link to download CyberSecurity *Pro* v6.11, but when I attempted to see if that would work, it said the product wasn't activated, so I did not proceed further. I do not have the customer's Eset login, and I'm not even sure if she ever made one. I even checked through our company's Eset Protect portal to see if I could make a standard installer, but only Endpoint versions were available. Is it possible to get a link for this version?

Well, that's unfortunate. I'd suggest adding that as a feature, since there are many cases I could think of where it would be useful. Thanks anyway.

Check and see if you have a mobile license. I logged into my account recently, and discovered a free mobile device license good until 2030. I'm guessing it's a promotional thing from Eset, but I had no idea until I looked. My guess is that you have the same thing.

So, as the guy everyone knows who knows computers, I'm often asked to help with their computers. One of things I like to do is remove their drive and scan for infections, but unless I uncheck the "Documents and Settings" junction point on the root, along with the "All Users" and "Default User" ones under Users, it ends up scanning my drive, too. Is there a way to tell NOD32 to ignore those junction points during a scan, or do I just have to deal with it? I've already gone through all the settings and can't find any that are relevant. It's not a massive issue, just mildly annoying.

The files went back all the way to 2015, so it had been accumulating for some time. I don't recall the specifics, as I already purged anything older than a month.

Is it possible to have Eset (currently v9, not upgraded to v10 because of a few usability issues) automatically purge quarantine files after 'X' number of days? I just checked one of my machines, and it had nearly 10GB of quarantine files (I use that one to scan for friends and family, when they get infections). I can do it manually, but it would be nice if it had a setting to happen automatically.

While a UEFI version would be nice, all computers do have support for CSM boot. You need to first disable Secure Boot in the BIOS, then save (or save and restart). After which, you can enable CSM and then boot from the disk/flash drive. It's not optimal, but it's possible. *EDIT* Just realized this post is several months old; nevertheless, the information is still relevant.

The filter enables you to filter records according to certain text they contain in specified columns plus you can specify the severity of the records to filter as well as the time period. If you need more advanced filtering, you can export the log to a text file and use other tools to filter the desired records. This is quite irritating behavior - and is precisely what brought me to the forums today - especially when it's the inverse behavior of how the "filter" option used to work. I thought perhaps it was a bug, only now to find out it's a "feature". Is there any chance of restoring the previous functionality, of excluding items in the filter, instead of filtering one item to the exclusion of all else?