• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About malkil

  • Rank
  1. latest detection
  2. a newly confession app sarahah is been trending now and a phishing link of the same with the url hxxp:// is also out. It needs to be bloacked virustotal says it is a clean website, but it may be because the app is launched as of now and no AV vendors have taken out any detection related to the website. please check the orignal website hxxp:// and phishing/ scam website hxxp://
  3. @Marcos i have send you the details via message
  4. @cyberhash hey mate all big programs are bugy, but there detections are very very much acurate i must say. norton on the other hand is a very well best alternate competitor to kaspersky and bitdefender. there was a time when norton ruled but as of now norton i must say is a good product but not as good as the above stated , the scan speed is good , but it takes so much time in removal of malware if running on demand scan. here is the thing, i had 9000 samples of malware, ransomware( including petya, wannacry) etc tested product - bitdefender, eset, kaspersky, malwarebytes, norton. all product settings were made to delete the file as soon as it is detected. here were the leftover files after the test out of 9000. bitdefender - 14 eset -1653 kaspersky - 153 norton - 24 malwarebytes - 3234 i could have used bitdefender , but it is as buggy as kaspersky as norton. i am thinking of using bitdefender free version but as of now i am in touch with there customer support as to whether free version gives protection against ransomware or not, if it would have been giving , i will go with bitdefender + malwarebytes and zamena antimalware as a cloud based scanner( uses multiple virus companies engine).
  5. its because bitdefender has been started to be best in past 3-4 years, otherwise kaspersky always topped the list. i know this would not be the best saying as i usually say, av test, av comparitives, top ten reviews, pc world, softpedia have always rated bitdefender as the best, second being kaspersky and norton
  6. the sample which i have provided can easily tell the password of ones wifi connection and sometimes of their router too. I guess detection is needed for this.\ the file named - WiFiPasswordRevealerInstaller ,when you will scan on virustotal does not shows any danger, virustotal shows it as a clean file, but personally if you will install the file and run the file then you will come to know that it can reveal your wifi password. sample attached @Marcos i tried to send the samples via eset online forum but it was not uploading the file , hence i guess someone from the admin staff can check the file
  7. yes i totally agree with you mate, talking about real world detections you have the results from av comparitives which continiously do real world protection test and av test which continiously do sample testing . my point is based on testing companies because they are thebedt one in doing the testing. thanks
  8. @MSE use bitdefender(paid or free) with malwarebytes premium and you are good to go
  9. it's better to use bitdefender, since there is no match between bitdefender and eset, bitdefender has always been one of the best product of all times. only kaspersky, trend micro and norton can match its detection level. talking about detection of phishing links , then you sshould use bitdefender with malwarebytes as they both are the best website to stop phishing websites. i am not saying eset is worst, it is good but it is not anywhere in competition to bitdefener, kaspersky or norton which always get 100% detection and i have never ever seen eset getting 100% detection from any of the testing companies. i am waiting for that day when eset will also be in the list of 100% detection group
  10. @itman thanks for the reply, if you are a staff member then thanks for the help, and if not then i would like you to consider this: when it comes to URLs Virus Total is NOT a good verification tool. Virus Total is good for files because every file has a unique and static checksum value. If a file is altered it has a new checksum value. Web sites, on the other hand, can change at-will. Each web site may have a specific singular or multiple URLs that lead to some kind of malicious or fraudulent content. There is no unique and static checksum value associated with any URL. Unlike a file with a static presence, web sites are dynamic. Not only can the content be changed at any moment in time, the content may be rendered and presented differently based upon such factors as; GeoIP, User-Agent and/or Browser client, IP address blockage tables and/or the existence of a specific Referral URL or the lack of a Referral URL. Or the content may be rendered and presented differently based a specific combination of factors. Here is a perfect example... hxxp:// That is a IP Address Block List. The above site is compromised and is serving up both Malware and Phish content. If you are on an IP in that table, you will not have access to that malicious content. Thanks
  11. you can compare the new eset products from below link and opt for the download also
  12. websites not blocked by eset hxxp:// hxxp:// hxxp:// hxxp://