Jump to content

galaxy

Members
  • Content Count

    248
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Kudos

  1. Upvote
    galaxy gave kudos to Marcos in HIPS and FIREWALL in default installation   
    I've captured a short demonstration video of how ESET detects today's fresh Filecoder.FS by HIPS/AMS with 3 weeks outdated modules.
    Moreover network was disabled to prevent updates and possible influence by LiveGrid:
     
  2. Upvote
    galaxy gave kudos to itman in NOD32 update   
    You're welcome. 
  3. Upvote
    galaxy gave kudos to persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Hi,
    Enable parental control --> block the uncategorized website (for having robust web filtering)then open a website that has now category so Eset block it but you may want to allow this URL fast.
    It Would be good if Eset provides an option to unblock websites by password from the browser(or from the parental control log), not Eset parental control settings. its easier to manage,
     
    Also, Eset hips show the loaded drivers but it doesn't show the digital signature for them.I like to see the signature.
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
  4. Upvote
    galaxy received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    If the theme was dark it would look even better
  5. Upvote
    galaxy gave kudos to Marcos in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Actually advanced users love the ability to customize numerous settings. Common users don't need to go to the advanced setup at all since ESET products provide well-balanced protection out of the box.
  6. Upvote
    galaxy gave kudos to Samet Chan in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Add - Dark Mode on ESET Nod32 would be great.
  7. Upvote
    galaxy gave kudos to Marcos in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Try clearing browser's cache. Please do not report issues in this "Future changes..." forum since this is intended only for posting suggestions for future versions.
  8. Upvote
    galaxy gave kudos to Marcos in Request for feedback on a plan to change handling of Potentially Unwanted & Unsafe Applications   
    Dear forum members,
    We are considering a change in the product's behavior but before doing that, we would like to consult you, our field experts with regards to the problem and suggested change.
    We kindly ask you to:
    Read this message carefully Talk with other people of your support staff, whether they are aware of issues related to current behavior Provide any comments (supportive / negative) towards the proposed change As of now, one of the issues that our customers are facing is the behavior of products in managed environment, related to handling of detections and cleaning of Potentially Unwanted and Potentially Unsafe Applications (hereafter referenced as PUA)
    The following are prerequisites of the behavior:
    Default cleaning settings on the Endpoints (normal cleaning) Detection of PUA is enabled. With these settings we were reported the following problems by several customers and resellers / MSPs that we have interacted with directly during a customer research.
     
    Main problems are:
    End users on local machines are forced to respond to an „interactive window“ that is asking for action in case of a PUA detection, which can by triggered by protection modules or the on-demand scanner. They offer the „ignore & continue“ action even in managed environments where the end user should not make decision. Users can try to install a PUA which usually ends with multiple interactive windows appearing. If a PUA is already in the system and you schedule an on-demand scan, it will be reported to the user again and a dialog with action selection is shown to the user. If this happens on a server, it will be never resolved; the dialog eventually expires, and then will be reported again and again to the server upon re-scanning. The only solution currently is to set an exclusion or to set cleaning mode to strict which will automatically remove the PUA detection without asking.
     
    What are we planning to do:
    We are planning to change the product behavior in a way that our endpoints will automatically block / clean PUA detections in managed environments according to the option selected by an administrator, meaning that the end users will never see interactive windows. Alerts (only one) will be reported to the ERA, and it will be up to the security administrator to either set an exclusion or acknowledge such detection. After exclusion, reinstall of the affected PUA will be needed on the target system; restore from quarantine is not enough since „cleaning“ also removes references which are not restoreable (this is valid also now, when Exclusion is „cleaned“).  
    We would like to hear from you and ask for feedback whether you consider this change as risky from the perspective of customer expectations. We do perceive the problem as serious and would like to change the behavior even for existing users by means of a module update. An alternative approach is to change it only in new versions of our products, meaning Endpoint V7 and eventually backport it to a new 6.6 hotfix if that happens in the foreseeable future.
    How the interactive window looks:

    How it looks in the logs:

    How it looks in the ESET Remote Administrator:

    Please note that we are also bringing a lot of changes into the ESMC:
    Cleaned „threats“ are automatically going to be marked as resolved (once the behavior is implemented, you will automatically get the PUA cleaned at the „first detection“) and will be automatically „resolved“ in ESMC (no duplicated entries when one clicks „no action“) You will be able to set exclusions directly from the threats section, basically by „one click“; there will be also an option to set „exclusion by HASH“ in EES.  
    Thank you for your feedback & support.
  9. Upvote
    galaxy gave kudos to Marcos in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Please open a new topic and provide more information, including hashes of the malicious files. It is not true that ESET is bad at protecting against ransomware, quite the contrary. Of course, if you have a weak overall protection and an attacker with admin rights manages to remotes in, no matter what security software you you since with admin rights the attacker can do virtually anything, including disabling the security sw prior to running ransomware. Again, no security software detects 100% of threats and if you claim the opposite, we could prove you to be wrong.
×