SeriousHoax
-
Posts
357 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Posts posted by SeriousHoax
-
-
I can confirm that using AdGuard for Windows (didn't test their VPN) nullifies ESET's ability to block malicious websites no matter what settings are changed in AdGuard. Once AdGuard is on, ESET is gone.
-
41 minutes ago, itman said:
Another interesting observation.
Excluding the browser DoH factor, the TLD is not detected by Eset blacklist used by Sucuri: https://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/crackingpatching.com .
Could it be that since the site is using a trusted cert., scanning of it is being ignored?
Only decryption of TLS is ignored for sites using trusted certificate, but blacklisted hosts are/should still be blocked by TLD.
-
Web protection not working properly, self-defense somewhat bypassed. Not a good week for ESET 🤔
An ESET official should privately contact Andy Ful on this matter to learn the method he used to disable ESET. He'll only share the details privately to an ESET official if they reach out to him asking the details and possibly take measure so that it doesn't happen again. As Andy Ful suggested, the preventive measure for this should not be a mere signature-based solution.
-
ESET officials need to have a look at this matter and find the solution ASAP.
-
56 minutes ago, itman said:
No problem in Firefox on this regard w/DoH disabled. When I select reload icon, the site is blocked again.
Same here. But on Chrome and Edge it's not behaving correctly even in default settings. So, it's a far more serious issue as more people use Chrome and Edge.
-
1 hour ago, itman said:
I would say DoH should be disabled on all browsers till Eset fixes the problem.
The above issue I showed in the GIF above is happening even when DoH is disabled in Edge. So, the problem is probably worse than we thought.
-
39 minutes ago, itman said:
Another observation.
With DoH disabled in Firefox, attempted access to https://crackingpatching.com/2017/03/avast-pro-antivirus-internet-security-premier-17-2-3419-0-keys.html results in blocking at the TLD as should be;
Time;URL;Status;Detection;Application;User;IP address;Hash
3/10/2024 10:09:53 AM;https://crackingpatching.com;Blocked;Internal blacklist;C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe;xxxxxxxx;2606:4700:3034::6815:2b2e;F736FE1F2C3ACB8E53F9E22EFE632D18B65DECCBCompatibility issue with DoH.
Have a look at this weird behavior on Edge:
-
12 hours ago, itman said:
Did more testing with the TLD https://crackingpatching.com/
The problem is with DoH enabled in Firefox.
With DoH disabled, Eset will alert and block access every time. When any of the DoH settings are enabled, Eset might block it once after setting change but not thereafter. Doesn't matter what DoH option is selected or DoH provider selected.
I am keeping DoH disabled until this is resolved. Glad you found this problem.
Well, now it's not even working for me in Chromium browsers. In Edge, the first time it blocks and then if I reload the page, it isn't blocked. On my testing Chrome Portable browser in another drive, web protection is not working most of the time even in default settings without DoH. Something is not right. It needs to be looked at fixed soon.
-
2 hours ago, itman said:
Found the problem, I believe.
Eset Filtered Web Site log shows it blocked access;
Time;URL;Status;Detection;Application;User;IP address;Hash
3/9/2024 11:43:27 AM;https://crackingpatching.com;Blocked;Internal blacklist;C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe;xxxxx;104.21.43.46;F736FE1F2C3ACB8E53F9E22EFE632D18B65DECCBTime;URL;Status;Detection;Application;User;IP address;Hash
3/9/2024 11:43:28 AM;https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/postmessageRelay?parent=https://crackingpatching.com&jsh=m;/_/scs/abc-static/_/js/k=gapi.lb.en.8uXxGUoumbY.O/d=1/rs=AHpOoo96qx3mL4tzGUOa-0q0udyPRqEAoA/m=__features__;Blocked;Internal blacklist;C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe;xxxxx;2607:f8b0:4023:140d::54;F736FE1F2C3ACB8E53F9E22EFE632D18B65DECCBBut web site access is not blocked.
Notice the redirect to Google. Looks like someone has figured out how to bypass Eset Web Filtering on Firefox.
Very interesting🤔
I have two blocks. But mine is a twitter redirect not google.
QuoteTime;URL;Status;Detection;Application;User;IP address;Hash
10-Mar-24 12:51:58 AM;https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.2f70fb173b9000da126c79afe2098f02.html?origin=https://crackingpatching.com;Blocked;Internal blacklist;C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe;****;F736FE1F2C3ACB8E53F9E22EFE632D18B65DECCBTime;URL;Status;Detection;Application;User;IP address;Hash
10-Mar-24 12:51:56 AM;https://crackingpatching.com;Blocked;Internal blacklist;C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe;****;F736FE1F2C3ACB8E53F9E22EFE632D18B65DECCB -
48 minutes ago, itman said:
I have Firefox DNS over HTTPS set to Default level w/CloudFlare as DNS provider. I am also using CloudFlare as my Win 10 DNS provider.
When I try to access the malicious URL in question, I can access the web site and even download the malicious crack.
Same here.
I am wondering if this is a FireFox problem since Eset blocks the URL on Chrome?
-EDIT-
I set Firefox DNS over HTTPS to Increased Protection level using CloudFlare as DNS provider. Eset alert now displayed on attempted web page access. However, w/ DNS over HTTPS set to Maximum protection, no web site blocking occurs. I would say this is indeed a Firefox bug.
I don't know whose bug it is but for me the example site is not blocked even in Increased protection mode. I tested two other security products, but they don't have this issue on Firefox.
-
When Firefox is set to use maximum or increased protection in DNS over HTTPS settings then ESET does not block blacklisted websites.
For example, here's a VT link of a fake crack program website already in ESET's blacklist: https://www.virustotal.com/gui/url/5583ee6d3fa820c9c851f37746d9b5a896da37bc7ce93329d6dcc02e4b7d9daa/detection
But with above DNS settings, it is not blocked:
When I set Firefox's DNS over HTTPS settings to Off, ESET blocks it.
There is no such issue on Chromium browsers:
Edit: In case it has some sort of connection, ESET's web protection also doesn't work when used with AdGuard for Windows. Changing any network driver or other related settings has no impact. To be clear, in the explained scenario in my main post I'm not using AdGuard for Windows.
-
2 hours ago, itman said:
Not possible.
Brave uses extensions from the Chrome Store. The only Eset extension available there is for Eset Password Manager.
The help link you gave above has the link to the extension in Chrome store:
https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/eset-browser-privacy-secu/oombnmpbbhbakfpfgdflaajkhicgfaam
-
35 minutes ago, itman said:
It does not support Brave;
https://help.eset.com/essp/17/en-US/banking_and_payment_protection.html?idh_config_bps.html
Not even if I manually install it?
-
Did you really see ESET's certificate in Brave? I don't think ESET officially supports Brave and also based on your screenshot ESET is not decrypting Brave's traffic as expected. You have to manually add the Brave's exe to Application scan rules in SSL/TLS settings and set it to Scan.
Also, I'm curious to know if "ESET Browser Privacy & Security" extension with Secure Search works in Brave. Do you know @Marcos?
-
Do two more scans with Norton Power Eraser and Kaspersky Virus Removal Tool. These two are the best second opinion scanners.
-
On 11/9/2023 at 8:37 PM, constexpr said:
So far we have evidence of these imcompatibilities https://support.eset.com/en/kb6063-eset-banking-payment-protectioncommon-errors
Thanks for this link, but I see that it only mentions some security software that have keylogger protection.
I'm talking about incompatibility with apps like this one: https://www.omicronlab.com/avro-keyboard.html which is used by a lot of people in my region. ESET is not compatible with this app. An ESET staff on this forum told me that ESET will work to make it compatible but that was a while ago. Nothing has changed so far. I think ESET should add apps like this to the incompatible list.
-
Since keyboard protection became default, I think ESET should have a support/help page where all the software that is known to be incompatible with default ESET settings should be listed.
-
FYI, I have tested some other top products on the site and none of them detected anything. ESET's detection is correct for sure as confirmed by Marcos. This once again proves (to me at least) that ESET is the best at detecting malicious scripts on websites. Many times, ESET is the only one/the first one to detect such things.
-
8 hours ago, itman said:
Still a no-go. All three tests show ECH not enabled.
If I disable Eset HTTPS scanning, all three tests show ECH enabled.
-EDIT- According to Mozilla, ECH in Firefox 118+ is based on existing DoH; DNS over HTTPS, processing. So assume Eset HTTPS scanning is also busting that.
Yeah, all AV products with SSL scanning function bust ECH.
-
46 minutes ago, itman said:
I will also add that I am no fan of anything Cloudfare based; especially their DNS servers. DNS security tests I have run show my ISP(AT&T) DNS servers are far superior to Cloudfare's.
As such, I could care less about this Firefox feature.
It doesn't have to be Cloudflare DNS. Any DNS that supports one of the encrypted DNS protocols like DoH, DoT, DoQ works. For example, I use my custom NextDNS.
BTW, for Firefox one may have to manually set "network.dns.echconfig.enabled" to True. There are methods to enable in Chromium browsers also.
-
31 minutes ago, Marcos said:
I don't think that any changes are needed. I've enabled maximum protection in secure DNS setup in Firefox 118 and didn't notice any issues. Https urls were blocked and test files downloaded via https were detected.
The thing is ESET's HTTPS scanning feature breaks Encrypted Client Hello. According to tests, SNI's aren't encrypted with default ESET. This is not just ESET of course, any product with HTTPS traffic scanning breaks it.
Only Adguard For Windows can apply ECH( even though it decrypts TLS connection like ESET) if you allow its DNS protection feature (enabled by default) and enable ECH from Advanced settings. It makes Adguard handle the DNS and apply ECH.
So maybe this is not possible unless AV products with HTTPS scanning feature like ESET handles DNS encryption by supporting ECH.
ECH is still not finalized and currently mainly supported by cloudflare services I think. But looks like eventually it will become a standard.
So I'm curious how ESET is going to handle this case.Sites to test if ECH is working or not:
https://tls-ech.dev/
https://defo.ie/ech-check.php
https://crypto.cloudflare.com/cdn-cgi/trace/For the last test site, you'll have to check if, sni=plaintext/encrypted.
-
4 minutes ago, C0kkie said:
Its a ssd and there are not many files
In that case, I'm not sure what's causing this.
-
As Marcos said it could depend on the number of files you have. Also, if it's a HDD then some higher disk usage is expected. It has almost no impact on SSDs.
-
31 minutes ago, itman said:
Two recent postings on the Kaspersky forum; also from yesterday;
Here's one from 2016 where the photo was probably hijacked from: https://wajraoforce.in/wajra/50-kb-photo/
My assumption is somewhat wrong then probably. Maybe a troll or a random geek using new persona on security forums.
Admins/Mods can delete my comments if required since it's a feedback thread.
AdGuard VPN incompatibility with ESET
in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium
Posted
Haven't tested with the new version yet. But when I tested, I wasn't using Adguard's DNS Over QUIC. It was Quad9 DoH.