PassingBy

The reason why they do not get ignored resides in the fact that ESET does not specify whether they are threats or not and the PUA classification is not enough to make me want to ignore them. So i'd rather monitor them as they send outbound or receive inbound data. If the way ESET classifies these threats was clearer i'd have long ignored them.

I have the same problem on two machines. I had to recreate the account

Hi there, After the update i am receiving hundreds of PUA notifications (one every 6 or 7 seconds) for the same apps. All of them with "AugurML" and in particular associated to IOBIT products and utorrent. Is there any way to stop this? It is driving me mad. The more i click ignore, the more it pops up again.

Hi, I have been using and testing a number of driver updaters of late. EIS causes a lot of issues during installation and, in some cases, .exe files are eliminated as PUAs. This has been the case with DriverBooster (daily notifications for months now, without clearly understanding whether the app is a threat or not) and, today, with Driverfinder, which i could not install (https://driverfinderpro.com/) In sum, are these false positives or the apps really pose a threat? Thanks in advance Rick

Thanks for adding up on this. The website confirmed they sustained an attack. The website was this one https://www.geopolitica.info/

I fully agree. As to the programs, i had to phase out CCleaner...even though no AV spotted issues. I am also becoming wary of "driver updaters". Iobit for example. I use it, but while most times the drivers it asks me to update can be updated from "Device Manager" simply clicking on the update option of the relevant file, at times Iobit driver updater spots "updates" that i can't see from device manager. I wonder where those come from and who manages them.

And Eset saves me from another problem. Threat confirmed by the website once I contacted them. My thanks for making my money worth the investment.

Installing it now.

I added the "Paranoid" mode as an extra but, in my mind, the difference between the MAX and the PARANOID level is that one enables most security options WITHOUT those that cause the most hassles (constant notifications, fake positives etc.), while the paranoid one enables everything and makes most interactions manual so that the user can't miss anything. There are options that if enabled allow you to have a much better control, yet...they pester you with notifications. This with the clear idea in mind that ESET standard settings are ok for most people. The core idea for me is adding the "SEARCH" bar. I found it timesaving on other software. As the complexity of the UI expands, especially in complex suites like ESET, having to go for multiple clicks and through error/trial to find what you need might eventually become a joykiller. Adding that Searchbar keeps everything as is but makes it much easier to find things. In particular if supported by autosuggestion. I have to reiterate, not all users have the time and patience to dig into those menus and at times solutions are needed in a timely manner. Why have to go to forums and databases to have answers you can get from the UI?

With all due respects. 1) Bottom line - no one is going "to spoon feed you" 2) However by doing so, you assume all responsibility for any adverse malware activity resulting from any change from the recommended default settings. The same assumption applies to any adverse system operational impact. Buying an antivirus must not be a job for researchers. So, if that fits well to you and your heroic tendencies and cravings for experimenting it's all good and fine but YOU are not all the users and not all users might have the spare time you have to waste in researches. I find myself OK. But there are users who have problems with that UI and no time to waste in endless searches on online documentation etc. Your conception is not only individualistic (it fits you, should fit the others too); it's obsolete and counterproductive; to a huge extent irrational. One buys a software to fulfill a task. The idea you are trying to push is that of a software that needs to be serviced as it is unable to adapt to the user. This is not about "spoon feeding". Rather about making the UI more intuitive. You seem to be worried at the fact that the software may escape the small elite that boasts the capacity to use it rather than be bent on expanding its use. At a first look, doesn't seem very constructive for ESET or for the users, except a few maybe.

With pre-set modes

If i can add some suggestion, rather than modifying the UI to simplify it, which may translate into reducing its granularity in customizing the app, there are two main ways to go to keep it as is and make it simpler. 1) Simply add a searchbox from which the user can search the required function and be redirected to it directly (akin to the SETTINGS section in the latest versions of Android to be clear). See picture attached. 2) Add a "Simplified mode" with 3 main settings for the whole ecosystem MINIMUM PROTECTION AVERAGE PROTECTION MAXIMUM PROTECTION PARANOID MODE AVAILABLE. That would keep everyone happy. While testing all other AVs i chose ESET because it has that "complex UI" with all those functions and i can set it as i want, despite the annoying part of it. I gave up on BitDefender exactly because i had no control on what i needed. I hope ESET does not go that way.

Thanks Marcos. No problem.

Thanks a lot. In my case it's Win 10 and Outlook 365

Hi, Since the latest upate i seem to have a new bug with the Spam module. Every time i mark a mail as spam, the home screen of EIS opens and i need to close it manually. This is systematic, for all mails marked as spam. Any clues? Thanks in advance

Dear Jason, Thanks for your feedback. I am surprised no feedback whatsoever came from ESET.

Hi, First things first, thanks for the ESET update. It's really appreciated. Little yet hopefully sound additions to its security. Now, to the subject at hand. Yesterday i ran a scan after the update and, while the scan window result is now resizable, the results are still as cryptic as it gets. So, if we watch in the screenshot below we have the following logic path. a) A set of dozens of detections b) 9 items detected (compared to what in that long row of detections?) c) 8 PUAs (what is the 9th issue in that long list?) f) Filtering doesn't help. There is a terminological disconnection between what we are looking for (9 DETECTIONS), what the list indicates (a long list of issues) and what the filter offers (Diagnostic, Informative, Warnings, Errors, Critical) May i humbly suggest to: 1) Indicate the "detections" with a different color ot maybe making them bold, and; 2) Add a "detections" or "threats" in the filter, so that an user can skip all what is not priority and just get to what counts? (somebody from ESET may reply that CRITICAL and ERRORS might be the case but it's not clear). What i am suggesting is to follow a "logic terminological path" between what the user sees in the list, what reads in the results and how these can be searched (Detections in this case) Please, let me know if all this makes sense but to me it's still confusing. A humble thanks to the ESET staff for the effort with the new update.

Are you sure that while uninstalling ESET you didn't lose also the certificates needed to access websites? This happened to me while testing BitDefender but during an install rather than an uninstall. Long story made short, the AV installed but the certificates didn't for some reason and this caused the internet access through browser to brick. There is a case where the uninstall also uninstalled the ESET certificates without substituting them with new ones (McAfee or anything else) and this might cause issues. Just an idea.

Thanks Marcos, - Please note that even if you give it for granted that the user knows they are PUAs, the notification that pops up does not qualify them as such. It speaks of threats. The color might identify it maybe. But if wording and colors aren't correct users get confused. - As to item 2, not. That only happens in reports, not in that pop-up window. But i am glad this is going to be fixed in the next iteration. I can live with it for now.

I have two small related problems. 1) EIS keeps marking components of Iobit Driver Updater and Iobit Uninstaller as potential threats. If i click on "Clean" core parts of the software are deleted and i am forced to reinstall them. 2) The second related problem (see picture attached), is the already mentioned issue of detected threats whose nature can't be understood nor explored due to the impossibility to expand the window or act properly in lack of more information on what these files do and why they are threats. The resulting outcome is that i have to keep clicking on Ignore dozens of times per session (like 40 or 50 times in 5 or 6 hours sessions), without any possibility to take action since i don't know whether this is a false positive or a real threat. I have sent the file to ESET a few days ago through the related option in EIS. I got no feedback nor any other information. Any of the experts have a good idea on the course of action to take? Thanks in advance.

Hi Random, Thanks to you as well. I don't doubt the method. But i lack the time to uninstall, downgrade, then re-upgrade. Also, i should do it on two machines, since the behavior is consistent on both machines. I rely on the fact that ESET will fix this at some point, hopefully, I am fairly happy with all the rest after all. Thanks Rick

Dear ebill, You're correct. I simply click on a banking link in my bookmarks and expect the window to open. At that stage i am redirected to the troubleshooting page instead of the link. I assumed it was normal to do that way. I will try to follow your advice. I have noticed the secure browing as a standalone works fine. The redirection from the standard browser doesn't. I still consider it an anomaly. But thanks a million for the suggestions. I really appreciate them. Rick

Here it is. Both machines do the same. eis_logs.zip

Hi, It is the third time that i start an online payment process on Firefox 66 and EIS' banking module automatically redirects the website to the troubleshooting page in ESET. The result is that, due to lack of time, i end up by disabling the function and executing the payment without any protection. Is this a bug or i am doing something wrong? Restarting ESET won't help. Restarting the PC won't help and i often am in a hurry, so no time for lenghty troubleshooting. It there any way to make this thing work out-of-the-box? Thanks in advance

I am not saying you're wrong, nor that you're right. But if you check the screenshots you'll see that there is an ongoing scan on an unit and then ESET asking me what i want to do on the small dialog box for the same unit. But that is not the problem. The problem is that it's all so confusing that an average user wouldn't know what to do. Also more experienced ones have an issue since they can't clearly see source of the file (folder etc in a clearly readable form) and more details on the threat. The point is how data is shown in the UI and the lack of a friendly representation and description. EDIT: indeed you were correct. The scan was done, the progress animation still ongoing and the window remains no resizeable, with the sole post scan log showing the full picture. I maintain it's not very intuitive. Data and action options should live in the same window, with detailed descriptions.